A Review of The Cove

The Cove throws a lot of things into one hat. It is part political and eco-activism, part investigative journalism and even part espionage thriller. Yet, at its core, The Cove is a true-life story about one man’s crusade to redeem his past mistakes. Ric O’Barry was one of the dolphin trainers on the landmark TV show Flipper (popular in the States before TV even arrived in South Africa). According to O’Barry, Flipper played a major role in kick-starting the now multi-billion dollar domesticated dolphin industry, but it was O’Barry’s experience in working so closely with his TV star dolphins that led him to believe that keeping dolphins in activity was both harmful and abusive to them.

Eager to atone for his mistakes, a remorseful O’Barry has since spent his life in actively working to free and protect dolphins. The Cove tells the story of how O’Barry has uncovered a dark secret in a small lagoon near a town called Taiji off the Japanese coast. Behind a wall of barbed wire and a plethora of “Keep Out” signs, and under the cover of night and intimidating guards, it is here that the fishermen of Taiji engage in an unseen hunt for thousands of dolphins. Prevented from seeing what is really happening in “the cove,” O’Barry and a group of activists led by the movie’s director Louie Psihoyos, embark on a covert mission to penetrate its barriers and in so doing they succeed in uncovering horrifying instances of animal abuse and also fairly serious threats to human health.

Although a documentary, The Cove is so expertly done that it manages to keep you on the edge of your seat throughout. Although it makes some difficult to prove assertions about dolphins such as their committing suicide when depressed or having self-awareness, it is still advocacy filmmaking at its best. O’Barry and his team use state-of-the-art equipment (including cameras cleverly disguised as rocks by George Lucas’ Industrial Light and Magic), and they form a kind of “Ocean’s 11” team of experts who use espionage techniques to get at the truth. And when they do, the truth is quite simply terrifying, not only in the cruelty that is displayed to these wonderful animals but also the threat this particular fishing industry has for human health. In selling dolphin meat disguised as whale meat they are exposing people to record levels of mercury poisoning.

The Cove also includes a great many facts about the toothless International Whaling Commission which is failing to protect dolphins properly. It shows how Japan is funding the fishing campaigns of many poorer companies and thereby buying their support in rolling back legislation that does actually protect whales.

All in all, The Cove is full value for winning an Oscar for best documentary. I cannot recommend too highly that you go to see it as soon as you can. The intention of The Cove is clear in that it seeks to expose you to some horrifying details of humanities cruelty and short-sightedness and thereby spurring you into action. I certainly hope The Cove exceeds its own expectations in this regard. Christians have been mandated by Scripture to care for and protect creation, and so getting involved in projects like this is a vital expression of our own faith.

Go and see this movie! 5 stars out of 5 for this absolutely brilliant eco-documentary!

Amongst numerous other awards, The Cove was awarded the IKEA Green Prize at the Rome International Film Festival. Here's a statement from the Jury on why The Cove was chosen for this award:

“for re-writing the documentary genre, transforming it into a cleverly edited film that packs an emotional punch with fast-paced action, scientific analysis and a story of personal redemption. The use of thermal camera shots, meta-language, video-reality and archive footage means this work transcends the glossy image of the natural history documentary. The original, hitherto unexplored theme informs us about a horror perpetrated in a bay in Japan that has repercussions around the world, a global horror that lays bare the cultural consumerism behind live animal shows, coupled with issues surrounding food safety and governmental corruption in the war to control the seas. We left the cinema with the feeling we could do something to dismantle all the bays of horror. Taking on the mantle of responsibility, we shout: No More Coves”

Lewd Clergy, Kill the Boer and Other Sensitivities

As languages develop the meaning of words can change over time. After all, it was within the life-time of my parent’s generation that the word ‘gay’ come to be predominantly used to describe homosexual people rather than happy people.

Words are dynamic, and languages stay alive by adapting and growing according to the context around them. Another example would be the word ‘nice’ which in the 13th century was an insult meaning foolish or stupid. It went through changes in the 18th century with various meanings like wanton, extravagant, elegant, modest, shy or coy. Now of course, it means good, pleasing, thoughtful or kind.

‘Silly’ meant blessed or happy in the 11th century and went through pious, innocent, harmless, and pitiable before ending up as foolish or stupid. My all-time favourite is the word ‘lewd,’ which once meant ignorant and was used to describe anyone who was not a member of the clergy. Personally, I think we should bring back its original meaning sooner rather than later.

A far uglier example would be the South African racial insult ‘k-----‘, a word so effectively used to belittle others that to even write it out in full as an example is considered unacceptable. Use of this word has been actionable in South African courts since Apartheid days in 1976 under the offense of crimen injuria, which is "the unlawful, intentional and serious violation of the dignity of another".

You may not know that this word originally was an Arabic term used to describe white people, or simply anyone who was not of the Abrahamic faith. It was picked up by Europeans and widely used between the 16th and 19th centuries and generally never as an offensive term. In fact, its early South African usage was a neutral term for black southern African people. However, over the 20th century it became commonly used to denigrate black people and now is so loaded with bile and hatred that it is virtually untouchable. With good reason it can be hoped this word will eventually fall out of practice all together.

The point I am trying to make is that words have tremendous history. In other times and rooted in different historical and cultural contexts a word can mean something completely different to what it does now. If you make a living at communicating (like a politician does for example), then it is vital to understand the dynamic nature of words. If you want to have clarity in your message then you need to understand how people generally understand words and phrases.

So why did it take so long for our leaders to understand how a struggle song which includes words like “shoot the boer” might cause offense to others? The argument that the song has a long history associated with the struggle should by no means lend it complete immunity to challenge. As I have pointed out the ‘k-----‘ word itself has a history of neutrality but since it began to be used hurtfully it has rightfully been sidelined. In the same way, if the words of a song, no matter how steeped in struggle history, causes fear and confusion amongst certain South Africans, then surely a government of racial unity should be far more open to ending its use?

Why did it take the unfortunate murder of one of our more infamous ‘boers’ and the ensuing racial hoo-ha for the government to actually consider opening the discussion table around the continued viability of this song? Surely, those in government, many of whom might have been on the receiving end of racial misunderstandings themselves would better understand such potential sensitivities? Rather than blaming the media for misunderstanding its cultural context and accusing them of fear mongering, perhaps our leaders should seek to better understand just how dynamic and powerful words and language are. All South Africans would ultimately benefit from that kind of sensitive and unselfish leadership.

Words change. And so should we.

Christian Scientists Excited by the ‘Genesis Machine'

On Tuesday of this week, the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC) directed two proton beams into each other to bring scientists one step closer to seeing how the universe may have looked like after its creation. This experiment is part of CERN’s search for the Higgs Boson, a theoretical particle also known as the God particle that scientists believe might give mass to other particles and thus to other objects and creatures.

Guido Tonelli, spokesperson for the Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS) experiment said that “We’ll address soon some of the major puzzles of modern physics like the origin of mass, the grand unification of forces and the presence of abundant dark matter in the universe, I expect very exciting times in front of us.”

Christian scientists were largely very excited by how this week’s milestone experiment by the informally nicknamed ‘Genesis Machine’ might lead to noteworthy insights into the creative work of God.

“This experiment is one of the most significant of this third millennium,” stated Dr. Karl W. Giberson of the BioLogos Foundation. Giberson believes that the experiment was an amazing event because it might well lay the foundation for further investigations that could answer some of our deepest questions regarding the universe around us.

Giberson added that “What is most exciting in this experiment is that it lets us push back a bit closer to that mysterious moment almost 14 billion years ago, when our universe emerged in the Big Bang. What the LHC might demonstrate is a piece of the grand puzzle: where does mass come from? If Christians can embrace the Big Bang theory, instead of inventing odd and implausible reasons to reject it, they will be drawn into a most wonderful world of grandeur that will greatly enlarge their concept of God."

Giberson, who is also a professor at a College in the States, is a theistic evolutionist – in other words he believes that classical religious teachings about God can be harmonised with modern scientific understandings.

BioLogos, was founded in 2007 by renowned geneticist (and Christian) Francis Collins, and the organization seeks to emphasise the compatibility of Christian faith with scientific discoveries about the origins of the universe and life.

Over the next 2 years, CERN plans to run further experiments with the aim of assembling enough data to make significant advances in some of these key issues. A vital part of their work will be the systematic search for the Higgs boson with the anticipation of learning far more about the nature and interaction of matter in the early Universe. CERN believes that these experiments might give them insight into the composition of around a quarter of the universe, said the Christian Post.

(Read the full story at http://christianpost.com)

A Review of The Hurt Locker

Does anyone else find it interesting that The Hurt Locker, a movie about the American invasion of Iraq won an Oscar over its main rival, Avatar, which was a movie about an American invasion of a distant planet? That said, The Hurt Locker was widely advertised as being ‘apolitical’ and with America being so polarised between those who support the war and those who don’t, it was probably wise to steer a middle line.

The Hurt Locker attempts this middle line by simply telling the story of 3 people, all team members of a bomb squad. They don’t really get along because James, the new bomb disposal expert is a risk-taking adrenaline junkie who endangers them all. At the beginning of the movie they have less than 40 days to get through before finishing their tour of duty, and James’ fellow squad members are desperate to make it out in one piece.
The Hurt Locker is brilliantly acted with Jeremy Renner, David Morse and Anthony Mackie taking the lead roles. This is not a movie you necessarily enjoy watching because it does its level best to take you into Iraq – it pins you to your seat with the tension of life on the edge in a war-torn country. People die horribly everyday and the movie attempts to immerse its viewers in the hard-core reality of that. Some of the soldiers react by slowly falling apart while others become adrenaline junkies – living for the ‘thrill’ they get out of danger. However, while different people react in different ways, not one of them escapes without being irrevocably changed.

By the way, I don’t think The Hurt Locker succeeded in being ‘apolitical’. Certainly its portrayal of Iraqis is more than a little condescending and dehumanising. While the Americans are not portrayed as being superior in terms of their morals or value systems, they are still more humanely and less stereotypically depicted. In this we are encouraged to follow them, sympathise with them and even root for them to win the various conflicts they engage in. This is probably because The Hurt Locker is telling their particular story but still I still struggle with how a movie about the Iraq war cannot even touch on the many innocent Iraqis who suffer everyday directly because of American presence in their country. You cannot be ‘apolitical’ if you don’t level the playing fields.

The end of the movie focuses on how the irrevocable change that war brings results in soldiers struggling to settle down into the normality of civilian life. James is stripped bare from his experiences, he is emotionally and morally vacant, and totally out of place in his home. In a rather cynical monologue with his toddler son, James tells him that while he loves many things as a young child, the inevitability of life means he will slowly stop loving ‘many things’ until he is eventually left loving only one or two things. James then sadly concludes by stating that he is left loving only one thing, and by that he means the adrenaline thrill of war.

The Hurt Locker does a good job in the way it illustrates how war and violence can strip people of their essential humanity, leaving them unable to properly function in normal environments. There is no doubt that The Hurt Locker is well made and brilliantly acted. Even though I am skeptical of its ‘apolitical’ stance, I do think its messages on many levels are compelling and thought provoking even if they are difficult to view. I do, however, remain unconvinced that this movie was worth an Oscar because I just don’t think it is worth more than 3 stars out of 5. Be warned that there is violence and quite strong language throughout.

Is Incompetent Leadership the Root Cause of South Africa’s Racial Tension?

The scary thing is that until a week or so ago, Eugene Terre’Blanche was irrelevant. From being the leader of an ultra-right wing party in the early 90’s that everyone feared had the potential to seriously derail South Africa’s attempts at unification, Terreblanche gradually sunk into obscurity. The AWB lost popularity as most whites realised that the ‘swart gevaar’ they had been brought up to fear was really not so bad. Under the inspirational leadership of Nelson Mandela, our country managed to steer itself away from civil war and further racial bloodshed. Terre’Blanche’s politics lost impetus because so many South Africans were inspired by Mandela to forgive and to learn to relate to one another despite their fears.

It is highly ironic therefore, that the murder of a political dinosaur who has been living the quiet life for years has served as a fulcrum point for renewed racial tensions. It must be said that this racial tension has been boiling and simmering for months, and Terre’Blanche’s death only lanced a long-festering boil causing all sorts of ugly stuff to come spilling out. While the ANC has been quick to deny it, many are pointing to Julius Malema’s constant use of thinly disguised racial rhetoric as being one of the prime causes of the heightening of South Africa’s racial tension. Over the last 2 months, this column has twice focussed on Malema’s tendency to engage in verbal violence to score political points, and observed that this constant verbal violence all too easily could become something worse. Of course, Malema is not the only one taking the cheap and nasty road to newspaper headlines – opposition party leaders and other community leaders have been quick to respond with their own verbal barbs and insults. Furthermore, lest we forget, Malema only does publicly what so many of us do privately when we tell insulting jokes, or make prejudicial comments about others because of their race, gender or sexuality. In some way, we are all responsible for the festering boil of racial hatred – when we engage in verbal violence to others we play our part in making this world an uglier place.

This is where I remember Mandela and the crucial leadership role he played in making South Africa a more beautiful place. Imagine if you will an average home where two children begin fighting over the same toy. It gets ugly quickly with the toy tug-of-war transforming a playground into a battlefield. Ugly things are said, and before long the children lash out at each other with the inevitable result being tears from both parties. What do good, caring, concerned parents who are concerned with shaping and forming responsible, functional children do in this situation? Well, in a nutshell, they need to provide good leadership. They need to engage with each of their children, punish them if need be, but most importantly, they need to teach their children a better way of disagreeing. They need to teach them to handle disagreements and conflict with grace, integrity and mutual respect.

Is this the root cause of the present racial crisis filling every newspaper - a clear lack of responsible, competent and committed leadership? Is that the difference between how Mandela steered us through so many crises and the present government? Never mind whether Terre’Blanche’s murder was really about race or not, it is clearly a wake-up call for us all and it should be a serious wake-up call for those responsible for leading this country. Surely, they should be setting the tone for thoughtful and respectful dialogues instead of the gutter politics they allow their members to engage in? The leadership of our country have seemed largely disinterested and frankly, incapable in guiding their younger and more immature “children” through what has become a quagmire of human ugliness. This present mess we find ourselves in should have been firmly dealt with months ago.

This present crisis is probably nothing more than a serious wake-up call but let us hope it is responded to wisely and proactively because it could easily become something worse. The good thing about a boil being lanced is that it does bring the ugliness out into the open and gives the wound a chance to heal. The leadership has been poor up to this point, yet this remains an ideal opportunity for inspirational figures to step in and help South Africans negotiate their differences in a way that will be a whole lot more life-giving for all concerned.

When Love Is Hard

“Woman, 77, attacked with spades.” “Hijackers assault man, take car.” “Woman swops girl for cocaine.” “Farm attacks: Costs mounts.”

It doesn’t take much more than common sense to realise that loving others is very, very hard to do. For example, just reading newspaper headlines like those above will give you dozens of reasons NOT to love others. We read of despicable actions by criminals, or ill-considered statements from community leaders that leave us feeling more than a little threatened and abused. Inside we feel nothing like love for them, but only anger and frustration.

Well, Jesus never said that loving others would be easy. The Gospels teach us that Jesus challenged people to love not just their neighbours, but also their enemies, and to love not just their friends but also strangers. There is just no way to get around it – Jesus wants his followers to enter the world equipped primarily with his love. This means, for example, when we read or hear about someone who drives us crazy because of their arrogance, prejudice, or cruelty, that Jesus wants us to learn to love them.

Yes, even them.

Eugene Peterson once wrote that “Relationships form part of the very fabric of redemption.” What Peterson meant by this is that God uses the warp and woof, ins and outs, ups and downs, victories and failures, laughter and tears of relationships to work his saving power into us – to knead it into the dough of our souls if that makes any sense.

You see whether we like it or not relationships change us. Think about any significant relationship that you have, whether it is a positive and life-affirming one, or a negative one say with a grumpy, domineering boss. Think about how much that relationship takes control of your day, how it affects what you think about and how you react to things.

Sin, really, is a failure to love. There is this scene in the movie ‘Amazing Grace’ where the reformed slave trader John Newton talks about his slaving activities and describes his fellow slave traders in the following way: “We were apes and they were human.”

What he meant by this is that his actions in treating his fellow human beings as less than human actually ended up making him less of a functioning person. Failing to love dehumanises us; it makes us less, but conversely learning to love and acts of love, especially when they are sacrificial and hard to do, makes us somehow more than we were before.

Our greatest purpose in life is to love each other just like God loved us through Jesus.

Everyone talks about achieving great things with their lives. And by that they mean fulfilling the potential of their gifts and talents. Yet, in God’s eyes you achieve great things when you love – when you seek to fulfil the full potential of your spirit and character.

The good news is that because relationships affects all of us so much, our loving actions can be passed along in quite amazing ways through our complex web of inter-relationships. This means that loving others, if healthily and passionately pursued, will not only transform us but also our surrounding social dimensions. It could even possibly change some of those news headlines which drive us crazy every week.

(The headlines above are taken from News24.com, dated 25-03-2010).

A Review of Everybody's Fine

This movie got panned by critics overseas, and was largely ignored by South Africans but for the life of me I can’t work out why. Its critics lambasted it for being overly sentimental and having a too-obvious plot with poor character development, and while I can appreciate the validity of these criticisms, I would still maintain the strengths far outweigh the weaknesses.

Everybody’s Fine is a remake of an Italian movie, and is a heartfelt, sad and yet ultimately redeeming comedy-drama. Robert De Niro is superb as Frank, a recently widowed father of four who sets out on a road trip to reconnect with his children. His life as a blue collar worker (he painted pvc onto phone lines) has led to him suffering from a debilitation of the lungs. However, the sacrificial labours of his life were gladly offered because he was so determined to provide for his family and allow his children to succeed. Although his medical condition prevents him from flying, Frank’s disappointment that all four children cancelled on a family visit leads to him braving the bus and rail networks of the U.S.

The double play of Frank’s work with telephone wires and his lack of connection with his children is used throughout. Everybody’s Fine tries hard to use visual ‘cinema noveau’ moments to promote its message, and I think these can be appreciated more often than not. Frank’s surprise visits are not well received by his children at all, and his journey really ‘surprises’ everyone because he finds his children are not nearly as successful as he was led to believe. It seems that the pressure of his own hard work in providing for them, as well as his constant admonishments for them to succeed, has resulted in each of them deeply fearing letting him down. This pressure created a fundamental lack of connection with Frank because each and every single one of them was led to lie to him in some way about their work or lifestyle.

This is exactly where the movie packs a serious punch ... in its message. For as Frank seeks to take on his late wife’s role of keeping the children together, they all discover uncomfortable truths about themselves. Frank realises that only providing for his family as a father is not enough, but that they also need his affirmation and acceptance as well. He realises that all he really wants for them is not success but happiness – to be more fully themselves and to be content and find meaning in their work and relationships.

Anyone who has been brought up in the home of a ‘baby-boomer’ would appreciate this movie. So many today have similarly strained relationships with their fathers where the pressure to be successful has sometimes caused intense disharmony. More than this so many have experienced fathers who have been good providers, but perhaps have not been emotionally (or spiritually) available to mentor, love and guide. Everybody’s Fine is extremely relevant in this regard.

A great moment of loss is experienced towards the end of the movie, which ultimately forces the family to draw closer together in love and support. Everybody’s Fine is sad, funny, touching and deeply redemptive. It might get a little soppy, and the characters of the children might be a little weak, but De Niro’s acting and the strong realism of the relationships means that the overall message is empathically carried.

It is the kind of movie which makes you want to call up your own parents, or gather up your children in your arms and hug them, and if this is the only reminder you carry away with you then it is well worth it. Although the ending is perhaps a little too neat, it is still an excellent reminder that if we truly seek to engage with our loved ones without forcing our own personal agendas on them, then love can win through even a lifetime of mistakes.

The Cry

Who could ever forget those awful clips of 9/11, of airplanes smashing into buildings while crowds of people below screamed in terror? What is burnt into my memory is one particular clip where you could actually make out people yelling in fear, “Oh my God, what is happening? My God, this can’t be happening. My God, where are you?”

It’s painful but not strange to hear people calling out to God. Even the staunchest of atheists can yell out for divine assistance as reflex action in times of fear, or pain, or desperation. That’s not strange at all. What does seem strange to us, however, is the thought of God crying. For that’s how Matthew’s Gospel ends Jesus’ life. With a loud sob of desperation, a yell of fear, a cry of abandonment.

That is a strange thought. I mean, this is God after all. We expect God to be powerful and to use power. In fact, that’s why, gathered around Jesus’ cross we find these mocking crowds. People saying things like, “C’mon down from that cross. If you are God, if you are the Messiah, then show us. That cross shouldn’t be able to hold you. You saved others but you can’t even save yourself! Show us your power!”

And so as Jesus shifted on the cross, as he gathered himself to speak, the crowds fell silent – waiting. The disciples tensed up, ‘let this be the moment, show your power’ they might have thought, and they waited as well. They all waited … and then … God cried. Not a sign of power, but one of desperation!
“Eloi, Eloi. Lama sabacthani.’ ‘My God! My God! Why have you forsaken me?”

Now this is strange, even mysterious. It doesn’t sound divine to cry like that, it sounds human. But it shouldn’t be strange. Painful to hear, yes, but not strange. I mean we all know God HAS power, that God created with raw, effortless power. But God has shown again and again that when it comes to saving us, when it comes to finding us, that when it comes to bringing us back into relationship with him, God will not use power.

For God will not force us, he will not kick down the doors of our hearts; he will not leave us without any other choices but him. No. He will love us. And he will reach us by loving us. And that is why God cried! As Jesus said over and over to his disciples – he was prepared to take his journey of love right to it’s inevitable end point, he was prepared to face all of life with us, even those vinegar bitter tasting moments, even if it meant facing death.

Love isn’t really love until we truly share each others experiences, until we learn to walk together with someone through difficult moments. Of course, love is laughing together, but love is also crying together. … and that is why God cried. Jesus’ cry of abandonment on the cross is painful for us to hear, but it is also the most loving thing we will ever hear.

The Cry reminds us that God chooses to share all human experiences with us, even the very worst. The Cry reminds us that what was holding Jesus to the cross while the crowds mocked him was not force, it was not nails … it was love. Choice held him there!

God cried that Friday because that is the way God chooses to reach us, find us and bring us back to him. God shares our deepest places of hurt, he experiences our greatest fears, and he walks through our worst places of abandonment and loneliness. “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” is the cry of one who has nothing else to give and nowhere else to turn, of one who has done all that has been asked of him in the face of loneliness and betrayal. It is also the deepest cry of God’s heart.

Craig Kocher says that this desperate, anguished, gut-level cry is the cry of parents who receive the phone call of their nightmares. It is the cry of the patient diagnosed with AIDS. It is the cry of a refugee with no place to call home. It is the cry of a family waking up to no feed to eat. It is the cry of a child, orphaned by a road accident. It is the cry of all humanity, longing for a day when tears and crying and death will be no more.

In this cry from the cross, God in Christ goes to the very depths of our sadness, abandonment, sin and death. When God cried he showed us the true power of love for in that moment Jesus gathered up all of humanity’s cries and tears in his own breath and nailed them to the cross in his own body.

And this is why the church insists on calling this Friday ... Good.

For this is the moment when the story turned forever. The Cry is sin’s last gasp effort to maintain control over the world and keep the divide between God and humanity. The Cry is death in the final throes of death, one last fruitless attempt to claim victory over life.

The Cry is that moment when love washed over sin, grace won over loneliness and Life defeated death. The Cry echoes on through history, and weaves its way through all our human experiences, and if we listen carefully this Easter weekend, we will hear it too.

We will hear its good news and feel its embrace. For no matter how we feel, the truth is that we are not alone, and we never will be. We are not abandoned, for God is here.

A Review of Alice in Wonderland

One would think that if you watch a Tim Burton/ Johnny Depp collaboration based upon a legendary Lewis Carroll novel, you would get a movie that is equal parts madcap hilarity, witty dialogue, and enterprising spontaneity all thrown in with more than a sprinkling of genius. After all, these three characters all share a certain zany similarity that should surely result in a very entertaining synergy. Sadly, this is not the case. My only reaction to this latest version of Alice in Wonderland is an entirely underwhelmed “meh”. Look, it is not a bad movie by any means; it is just that it is very average. Allow me to explain why.

The action in this movie has been moved forward by thirteen years. Alice is now almost 20 - her previous experience in Wonderland is explained as a confused dream that later turns out to be genuine. The 19 year old version of Alice is attending a garden party where a very unappealing member of the aristocracy proposes marriage. Fleeing him, and pursuing a overcoat adorned white rabbit, she kneels at the base of a tree and peers down an immense hole. Then she falls in. All according to “Carollian” plan so far, no complaints from me.

The fall is one of the more enjoyable parts of the film because special effects are now advanced enough to finally do justice to Carroll’s imagination. Alice lands in a small, round room where she has to shrink, grow and then shrink some more to fit through the door. On the other side of the door Alice runs into a crowd of wonderfully absurd figures who launch into a wonderfully absurd discussion of whether or not this is the “right Alice.” Everything so far is entirely worthy of Carroll’s original story.

Unfortunately, that’s where it ends. Cue end of Alice in Wonderland, and cue beginning of Alice in Middle Earth. The plot from here on is standard Tolkien fantasy fare. It involves a land overtaken by the darkness of a wicked tyrant, a monster (the Jabberwocky), and the search for a magical item (sword) by a reluctant, unassuming hero. Other than one or two moments of dialogue, and the appearance of his original characters, there is almost nothing “Carrollian” left in the story line. People have always loved Carroll’s work for its wonderful unpredictability and bizarre round-about logic, but this story line is entirely too predictable if you ask me.

Look there are some enjoyable aspects to the movie nonetheless. The bloke sitting next to me kept on giggling throughout at some of the lighter moments, and there was definitely some “Lewis Carroll” inspired conversations (more “muchness” anyone?). There was also some quality acting. Mia Wasikowska was good as Alice, Johnny Depp was entertaining playing the Mad Hatter, and Helana Bonham Carter was quite wonderful as the evil Red Queen. Anne Hathaway on the other hand was truly awful as the White Queen. In fact, she was downright creepy with her all-white, anemic ensemble contrasting starkly with black lipstick and fingernails. To be honest, if I was a citizen of Wonderland I would be as uncomfortable with her being my political liege as I would the tyrannical Red Queen. Flouncing about distractedly with hands in the air she seemed to be only a couple of tottering steps away from a complete mental breakdown.

Then there is the meaning or message of the movie. True to form, Tim Burton steers away from the Christian symbolism of the original story, but instead settles on a kind of a “I am a woman, hear me roar” ending. Alice is transformed from a distracted 19 year old Victorian girl to a 21st century industry-shaking pioneer at the end of the movie. So we are meant to believe that capitalism is the answer for a girl who falls down rabbit holes. Boardrooms and international trade in China is the natural progression from the wonderfully multi-coloured world of Wonderland. I could almost picture Alice clicking open her laptop as she sails away to China in that very strange final scene. “Meh” is all I have to say to that. Look, I am not against a message of feminine empowerment at all, it’s just that it didn’t fit into the original character and vision of the story of Alice in Wonderland. Alice and the other characters were all somewhat anti-establishment so a colonial capitalist is just not what you would think Alice would grow up to be.

In fact, that’s the whole problem of this movie. Not everything “fits”. Burton’s overall vision doesn’t mesh with Lewis Carroll’s and so each weakens rather than strengthens the other. The special effects, especially in the 3D version are a treat, and some of the Lewis Carroll inspired conversation is delightful, but on the whole they don’t manage to lift an ordinary storyline enough to make the entire enterprise above average.

An entirely, ho hum, mildly entertaining “meh” score of 2 (and a half) out of 5 for this latest rendition of Alice in Wonderland.

The Power of Words

My four year old daughter was in tears the other day because one of her little school-friends told her that she no longer wanted to be friends. Only four and already she has experienced the power of another’s words to hurt and wound. It took many, many positive and loving words from her parents to calm her spirit and give her the courage to face another day at school. The funny thing is that no matter how old we get, words never seem to lose their power over us. Words of rejection or disrespect can totally ruin our day, whilst words of love and encouragement can inspire us to great heights.

What surprises me about Julius Malema is that he should more clearly understand the power of words. He has been central to the survival of Jacob Zuma’s political career over the last few years because of his wholehearted and passionate vocal support. Yet, Julius Malema’s career as head of the ANCL has been marked by very ill-considered and hurtful pronouncements. His latest words of controversy were sung along to an old resistance song made famous by Peter Mokabe - “Kill the boer (farmer)”. This is on top of the Equality Court ruling this week against him in a hate speech case regarding comments he made about the woman who accused Jacob Zuma of raping her.

To be fair, Julius Malema is not the only prominent member of society to ignore the power of words to hurt and victimise (a lesson even four year olds are aware of). Many politicians, shock jocks and hip-hop stars commonly utter words which only serve to label, stereotype and often seriously insult their fellow human beings. Maya Angelou, the American poet renowned for her wisdom and grace, was once queried about the fact that many of these people defended their right to do so by describing their efforts as part of their ‘art’. Angelou just gazed at her interviewer and replied, “Vulgarity is just vulgarity.” She is so correct, ugliness is just ugliness and there is no hiding from it. I am interested in the ANC’s response to the public outrage over Malema’s song by stating that this particular song is part of their cultural heritage and those offended are not fully appreciating its context. Well, I am sorry but vulgarity is just vulgarity and violence is just violence. If our words diminish or threaten our fellow human beings in any way, then to defend them by describing them as ‘art’ or ‘culture’ seems absurd.

Malema is a good example because he is well known, but really this is a lesson every human being should be deeply cognisant of ... that words have tremendous power to diminish and destroy, or to build and encourage. At this crucial juncture in our nation’s history, I would like to see our leaders and role models doing a little more building and less destroying, but this is not only a macro challenge for the famous amongst us. On a micro level the words we ordinary folk express to our neighbours, or our fellow commuters, or to those we walk past on the street should always be carefully considered – simply because our words do have such power to either build or destroy.

The reality is that not one of us is innocent of the kind of verbal violence Malema engaged in through singing that song. Many of us have repeated prejudicial, sexist or homophobic jokes just because we find them funny, or because they help us to feel superior. Many of us have at times allowed our anger, fear or personal issues to explode out of us in a torrent of words designed to punish and hurt. In some way we are all guilty of what Malema has done. As one pastor was heard to loudly proclaim to his congregation, “All those present here that are guilty of the sin of slander or gossip, may your tongue stick to the woof of your mowf!” None of us is innocent in this regard.

Equally, many of us have also been on the receiving end of hurtful words. We have endured the deep and bitter pain of being slandered, gossiped about, or disregarded. Sticks and stones break my bones but words will never harm me? What utter rubbish! We know from personal experience the tremendous power of negative words. This is why it is not hard to imagine what can happen when we begin using that power constructively. To intentionally and imaginatively use our tongues to build up, lend hope and empower. Imagine how we can transform society when we attempt to negotiate our differences more respectfully, and when we wisely use the power of our words to bless and inspire, to love and to create. I can’t help feeling that that’s how God originally intended it to be. For when God spoke, there was ... life.

A few Sundays ago there was a horrific attack on three small villages near Jos, Nigeria because of Muslim/Christian clashes. This is the latest in a series of altercations between adherents of the two religions in this region. These attacks, which saw the needless deaths of hundreds of people, are sadly only the latest amongst many similar incidents of hate in the name of religion. Not one of the major world religions has its hands clean in this regard, for while all have at times been the victims of religious hatred, at some point in history each and every single one of them have also actively participated in violence against others in the name of God.

The Vatican denies that religious reasons are solely behind this latest attack, instead pointing to many underlying social and economic factors. The Catholic Archbishop of Nigeria, John Onaiyekan, has stated that the clashes have resulted from conflict between Muslim shepherds and Christian farmers. Interestingly enough, the clash between nomads and pastoralists is ages old with many scholars believing that the story of Cain (shepherd) and Abel (farmer) is an ancient example of these tensions which are commonly created by competing over resources.

Whatever the reasons religious violence remains a deep stain on the reputations of all religions. Many of the so called ‘new age atheists’ who are vehemently against any form of religion whatsoever, would cite this as a perfect example as to why religions bring more harm to the world than good. While most Christians (sadly, not all) would equally vehemently deny that any form of violence in the name of God is ever justifiable, it is concerning that we do not seem willing to engage more comprehensively with this issue. We should carefully interrogate exactly what it is that is so deeply wrong with killing in the name of God, so as to offer more meaningful and helpful responses to those left questioning these incidents.

In her book ‘The Ten Commandments – Laws of the Heart,’ Joan Chittister, a Benedictine nun, makes an interesting point regarding the third commandment – “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God” (NIV). Whereas we traditionally limit our understanding of this commandment to mean that we should not use God’s name as an expletive or too casually, Chittister presents a much deeper and more significant understanding. She explains that in ancient times when these commandments were first given, society attached greater importance to names. Names had a great deal of power. To name someone was to endow them with the characteristics implied by that name (a belief still held in many cultures). Thus, to take the name of God and attach it to any exercise or venture should be done with great humility, and even trepidation. As Chittister explains swearing is not the most insulting way of taking God’s name “in vain,” but whenever and wherever we use God’s name to exploit, or to exert power, or as a means of attaining selfish gain it becomes a matter of far greater severity.

This is why any and all violence in the name of God, which is so contrary to the spirit and message of God, actually violates the sacred name, and therefore the character and nature of God. As Annie Lamott once wrote so succinctly, “You can safely assume that you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” To allow this criticism to be laid only at the door of those who participate in physical violence would be foolishly misleading. We hurt people with verbal violence “in the name of Jesus” all the time. A friend of mine who offers a fairly liberal and yet very compassionate version of Christianity once shared with me that the “religious right” (his words) never seem to engage with the content of what he has to say but seem only interested in “character assassination” (again his own words). For example, critics have emotively called him “the whore of Babylon” without ever taking the time to reasonably explain why the critic feels he has fallen into heresy. I don’t happen to think Christians need to agree with everything my friend says, but for the life of me cannot fathom why people cannot extend to him the love and grace of the same Jesus they feel so desperate to defend.

Really, what happened in Jos, Nigeria happens in so many different ways all the time. It happens whenever we use verbal violence, gossip or slander and somehow feel entitled to attach the name of Jesus to it. Of course, we can challenge and disagree with each other to our hearts content – let’s just do it in a way that is obedient to Jesus’ command to treat others with love, respect and dignity. Furthermore, as we keep in mind Chittister’s teaching regarding the third commandment, we should be extremely humble and gentle with whatever we might want to pronounce in God’s name.
__________
This article has been written by the Rev. Gareth Killeen, the editor of CruxMobi – a mobile based magazine which seeks to connect Christian faith with news, current events and real life issues. See http://cruxmedia/mobi

A Review of The Book of Eli

Hollywood’s fascination with post-apocalyptic tales continues in The Book of Eli. With its sepia-toned ash strewn landscapes and crazed cannibals it has a certain similarity of feel to The Road but frankly, that is where any comparisons should end. Whereas The Road is thought-provoking and soul-stirring, The Book of Eli is more akin to a combination of the The Last Samurai meets Mad Max.

The violence in The Road is disturbing but never glorified, for in fact, it actually enhances the overall message as it is a reminder that even the weak can live meaningfully if they cling onto hope amidst the real horrors of their world. The difference is that The Book of Eli’s main character is not a victim, but an almost untouchable warrior who deals out gruesome deaths with a flick of his wrists and with background music pumping. In other words, the violence is both gratuitous and glorified.

Denzel Washington, the son of a Pentecostal pastor and committed Christian, plays the role of Eli – a survivor of a nuclear war that devastated the globe. He believes he has been called by a mysterious ‘small’ voice to carry the only surviving copy of an old KJV Bible across America’s wastelands to some unknown destination ‘in the West’. All other Bibles had been burned by the nuclear war survivors who blamed its teachings for the war (if none of this seems clear to you, don’t worry, it’s not just you).

Along the way he runs into Carnegie (Gary Oldman) who playing to stereotype is a psychotic despot ruler of a small town that is kept in line by his brutal gang members. He has whole teams of his lackeys searching for a copy of ‘the book’ – a Bible because it is his belief that such a book will give him power over others. He is interested in expanding his empire and believes he can use the Bible as a ‘weapon’ to bend peoples wills to his own. Eli also believes in the power of this book but wants to preserve it all costs (at ALL costs believe me) because he hopes its divine wisdom in the right hands will help save his devastated world.

These differences lead to some violent altercations and a pursuit across the bleached landscape as Eli continues his westward quest. In the meantime, Carnegie’s stepdaughter (Mila Kunis) fascinated by Eli and his mysterious faith, throws her lot in with him and becomes involved in his journey and eventual escape TO Alcatraz (sorry about the spoiler).

Christian reaction to this movie in the States has been fascinating. Many Christians have wholeheartedly embraced its message because the Bible plays such a central role, and because of Eli’s example of ‘walking by faith not by sight.’ Personally, I struggle to see exactly how this movie positively promotes a Christian worldview. The fact that Washington has been voted the second most influential Christian in Hollywood, and the fact the movie involves preserving a Bible, does not necessarily mean it automatically qualifies as an authentic messenger of Gospel truth.

In fact, not at all for the violence in it quite ruins any message the movie might have. While much of what Eli does is in self-defence, the whole enterprise is far too confused about whether people of faith are ever justified in using violence to proclaim their message. The Church has made this mistake in its history (crusades and inquisitions) quite overlooking that Christ himself endured the very worst of violence and responded only with mercy and forgiveness. We should never forget that the very essence of Christ’s message is intrinsically linked to non-violent responses and ways of being. I especially disliked the way Washington was seen to stylistically whip people’s heads off with all the grace of a Samurai warrior as part of his overall mission. He also was quite prepared to hide and not use his warrior gifts while a woman was raped and her partner murdered because that might conflict with his ‘mission’.

I would give this movie 1 star out of 5, and wouldn’t bother going to see it if you haven’t already.

Peacemakers in an Age of Violence

I started wrestling with this topic because of the movie review I wrote on The Book of Eli which has these very confused messages on the relationship between faith and violence. Movies are commonly filled with violence precisely because our society is ... they mirror our reality as an act of interpretation and dialogue. Undoubtedly, we do live in an age of violence - South Africa’s own newspapers are constantly filled with stories of violent crimes and horrible violence. This age of violence is nothing new; it probably would be an apt description for almost every generation since our earliest beginnings.

This distinct lack of peace seems to come from somewhere within humanity. We seem to be at war within ourselves in terms of our prejudices, hatred, lack of forgiveness, greed and pride, all of which spills out of us and creates societal mayhem. Even the church, which bears the name of Jesus the Prince of Peace, has to its shame, allowed the cross to be displayed on shields of war. Equally shameful, is how we have historically been involved in crusades and inquisitions.

I find it incomprehensible that Christians have ever used violence as a means to propagate their message when Jesus’ challenge for us is to act as peace-makers, and to be actively involved in matters of societal justice and righteousness. Christ-followers should be involved in bringing God’s love to all areas of need – wherever there is poverty, war, disease and strife – that’s exactly where we need to be involved in working for change. In Matthew 5, Jesus said ‘Blessed are the peace-makers, for they will be called children of God’. Children of God! Peace-makers will therefore be OF God, they will be LIKE God, they will be living life like God does.

Yet, it is difficult not to feel cynical or defeated, before we even begin trying to bring peace to our societies. As Jesus himself said, ‘the poor will always be with us’, one dictator always seems to rise up to replace another, and greed so often seems to win out in the decisions made by governments and community leaders. So why even bother then? If we are not going to ever completely rid the world of all injustice and conflict, then why don’t we just stop even trying to make a difference? We may feel like John Mayer does in his Grammy nominated song ‘Waiting on the world to change,’ where he says, “it's not that we don't care, we just know that the fight ain't fair, so we keep on waiting, waiting on the world to change.”

Yet, as small and as un-influential as we may feel, the promise is that when we go out into the world as peace-makers, we WILL make a difference. Anne Herbert came up with the wonderful phrase: “Practice random acts of kindness and senseless acts of beauty,” which to me, sums up Jesus’ gospel call for us to be peace-makers.

You see, when we refuse to return violence with violence; when we offer persistent and never-ending forgiveness; when we do small little things everyday that bless people instead of curse them; when we don’t return road rage with road rage; when we are kind instead of mean; and when we are generous instead of being petty – IT ALL MATTERS, IT ALL ADDS UP, IT ALL MAKES A DIFFERENCE! For then we are peace-makers, children of God living in his image, and little by little, step by step, we are bringing Jesus’ peace in situations of conflict.

Abraham Lincoln once said: “Die when I may die, I would like it to be said of me, that I always pulled up a weed and planted a flower where I thought a flower would grow.”

The small things make a difference! The small, little things we do every day transform our characters, either for good or bad. And in like manner the small, little things we do everyday can transform society bit by bit, either for good or bad.

__________
This article has been written by Gareth Killeen, the editor of CruxMobi.

A Review of The Road

I remember reading somewhere that the numbers of apocalyptic literature produced always increases when the world finds itself in some sort of crisis. It certainly seems this way post 9-11 and the global economic recession, for apocalyptic and disaster movies are a dime a dozen of late. The Road is yet another in a fairly long list but it happens one of the very best that I have ever seen.

It certainly is not easy to watch. The post-apocalyptic world of The Road is one filled with darkness and grey, despair and bleak lifelessness. Yet, amidst this hell on earth we see a father’s love for his son, and his son’s love for goodness which guides them both through the mess like a beacon in the dark.

The movie is based on Cormac McCarthy’s Pullitzer prize-winning tale of a father and son struggling to survive in a harsh world of destruction and danger, where violence looms around every corner and the ‘good people’ seem few and far between. McCarthy’s book is a tale of “love among the ruins” that reminds one to keep the flames of goodness and hope flickering even when life is at its very worst.

Set against the backdrop of an unknown apocalypse, we follow "Man" (Viggo Mortensen in his career-best) and "Boy" (11-year-old Kodi Smit-McPhee), unnamed because the world they live in has no time for luxuries such as names. The Road follows them on a dangerous journey in which nature is dead and dying, ash constantly permeates the air, and violent cannibal gangs scavenge among the weakest for their food.

You cannot watch this movie and not feel unsettled, or feel along with the Man his sheer desperation to keep his beloved son safe and alive. The Man constantly has flashbacks to better times when his wife (Charlize Theron seen only in flashbacks), shared many happy experiences before civilization fell. These scenes portray a lament for a world that will never be the same again.

So where is God in all this? Well, one character observes that if he does exist "he would have turned his back on humanity long ago." And yet despite the apparent godlessness of this tragic world, God is still somehow there, if only in bits and pieces. The Man makes a declaration that: “The child is my warrant. And if he is not the word of God, then God never spoke." These poignant words echo through the film as The Boy repeatedly challenges The Man to be compassionate to those weaker than them, to be forgiving when they are wronged, and to be thankful when rare blessings emerge.

Ultimately, the Boy is a reminder to his father that there is no point in surviving if you lose your humanity in the process. This is how they manage to carry a flame of hope through even the bleakest of landscapes. As McCarthy said in a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, "It is more important to be good than it is to be smart."

The Man and the Boy constantly use the expression “to carry the fire” as a reminder to keep the spark of human goodness alive. The fire represents the best of people, a kind of self-giving love in a world which has lost all sense of community. The boy has it the most, even though he was born after the apocalypse and never knew a world of charity.

“The Road is a parable of how a child is born into this world where there is no kindness. And yet, he manages to find this and nurture it and even teach [his father]," explains the director John Hillcoat, "Cormac McCarthy [the author] told me that if there's no spiritual dimension, then life is a vacuum and meaningless. He thinks that active struggle with faith is the key. This story is like the book of Job, it's just challenge after challenge after challenge."

This is a seriously good movie but also deeply disturbing. Be warned that this is not an easy movie to watch, although much of the violence is not seen but ‘heard’ and ‘felt” (it is atmospheric). On top of the violence, it also contains some strong language and a few brief scenes of male nudity.

Did you know that since the beginning of recorded history, which is around 3600 years, humanity has enjoyed only 286 years of peace? That works out at less than 8% of the time! During this period, there have been 14 500 wars in which upwards of 3.60 billion people have been killed.

Yet, we don’t need really need the testimony of history to remind us how violent our species can be. This is because our everyday news is constantly filled with random acts of violence and senseless acts of brutality. Just this week, newspapers have carried stories such as of a father beating his son to death with a metal rod, police brutality, and violent protests in Balfour.

So where exactly is Jesus in all this? After all, didn’t the Old Testament prophesy that Jesus would be “Immanuel, the Prince of Peace?” Didn’t Jesus himself promise to leave his disciples with a gift of peace – “not as the world gives, my peace I give to you”?

Sadly, the church has not often carried this spirit of Jesus’ peace out into the world. When only a couple of hundred years old, the church allowed Emperor Constantine to display the cross on shields of war, and furthermore has actively participated in violent crusades and inquisitions. This is the same church which claims its foundation is built upon the Jesus who taught and lived forgiveness, reconciliation and restoration rather than vengeance and retaliation. A couple of years back, I read the story of a group of churches in Arkansas who decided to group together in a ‘march for peace.’ Unfortunately, half way through there was a disagreement about the route of the march and they ended up dividing. This would be funny only if it wasn’t true!

So how can we as Christians approach this huge problem of violence in this world in a way that is creative, impactful and makes a positive difference? How can we become the ‘peace-makers’ Jesus challenged us to be?

First of all, we need to grapple with the fact that Scripture challenges each and every human being to be aware of what is within our own hearts. While we may not actively participate in acts of violence, sometimes we carry within us seeds of prejudice, hatred, un-forgiveness, greed and pride which all contribute to the greater problem. The Bible reminds us that thoughts of violence or hatred should be avoided just as much as real acts of violence. We all need to constantly (and humbly) guard ourselves in this regard.

Secondly, we need to understand exactly what Jesus meant when he talked about peace. For Jesus there never was a separation between inner and outward peace. Christians often argue over whether Jesus intended peace in our inner souls, or in outward society. Clearly, it is both. Like everything in faith’s journey, they are paradoxically yet wonderfully meshed together. One becomes more viable and meaningful only when it is inextricably attached to the other.

Inner peace and everything that entails (trust, faith, love, wholeness, forgiveness), will result in our lives outwardly influencing society and the relationships around us. Thus, inner peace will naturally (or supernaturally!) result in outer peace-making, yet at the same time, if we are not involved in working for outer peace, then we are not truly trusting, or having faith, or loving, or forgiving.

In essence, being a peace maker involves living lives of unselfish service, for without working for God’s justice there should be no personal peace. However, if we ONLY work for justice, without seeking inner restoration and reconciliation (redemption) then we will equally miss the point.

So perhaps the greatest challenge is to remember that in our world of horrific violence, Jesus has called us all to be peacemakers. We need to allow ourselves to be fundamentally changed and transformed by God’s love and then actively live that out within a world that is desperate for real forgiveness, mercy and goodness to not only be talked about, but also lived out in ways that are both practical and real.

A Review of Up in the Air

Up in the Air is one of the best movies I have seen in a long time. George Clooney who seems to get better and better with age, plays Ryan Bingham, a ‘career transition specialist.’ His occupation really is to relieve people of theirs. He spends up to 322 days on the road, flying from one destination to another and firing employees for all those corporate bosses too afraid to do it for themselves.

Even a script with such a grim subtext doesn’t necessarily need to be depressing, which writer/director Jason Reitman has made something of a speciality with his last two features being Thank You for Smoking and Juno. With an exceptionally clever script and great starring turns from leads George Clooney, Vera Farmiga and Twilight’s Anna Kendrick, Up in the Air has you laughing in one moment and then pulls at your heartstrings in another.

Adding vitality to the heartbreaking scenes of Ryan Bingham’s daily work is that real people who had experienced real life retrenchments were used instead of actors. Whether you've ever been a victim of a recession and downsizing or not, you can't help but feel sad, confused and angry right there with them.

While we are never quite sure Bingham loves his work, he certainly loves his solitary, Up in the Air existence. It’s totally devoid of commitment, affection and other messy complexities of life. He even moonlights as a motivational speaker, giving self-help lectures on how to simplify life by avoiding relational interaction and obligation.

Through the course of the movie, two spanners are thrown into Bingham’s machine. First, he meets Alex, (Vera Farmiga), his female shark-like equivalent, who is looking for no-strings-attached sex and companionship on business trips. Yet somehow these trysts gradually leave Bingham suddenly feeling lonely and hoping for more.

The other spanner is young dynamo new employee Natalie, (Anna Kendrick), who proves equally disruptive to Bingham’s detached routines. She introduces the idea to Bingham’s boss (Jason Bateman in a great cameo), of firing people remotely over the Internet, possibly saving their company millions in travel expenses—but simultaneously threatening Bingham’s ‘up in the air’ existence.

Ironically, Bingham argues that people deserve a personal touch when being let go, and demands that the inexperienced Natalie learn the old ways before trying to change the status quo. Their boss agrees, but requires Bingham to do the showing on a cross-country firing expedition. Immediately, these two challenge each other’s core beliefs, and both are left in a dilemma: Natalie struggles to live with herself as she demolishes other peoples’ lives, while Bingham is left wondering if he can finally face having a mature relationship.

Essentially the movie explores the price of relationship – and the cost of a life without them. It is significant that The Velveteen Rabbit is used in one of the scenes, as this story touches upon Bingham’s greatest struggle, his fear of becoming authentic through relationship. After all, there is no doubt that being in relationship with others is difficult. As this children’s story demonstrates, it wears out your joints, exhausts you and damages your fur.

But, it simultaneously makes your life and world wonderfully real. The Biblical message never shies away from the raw cost and difficulties of relationship, but at the same time Scripture urges (even commands) us to take up this cost. We are reminded that we have been created in love, by love and FOR love. God made us for relationships (and the commitment that involves), and ultimately, we find ourselves and our life’s true meaning within that whole process.

Bingham does grow to realise that his sterile reality is not a life at all. I am not going to give anything away, suffice to say that the movie never veers into sentimentality or predictability.

Go see this movie! (Please be warned that it does contain some strong language and sexual content).

President Zuma and the issues of sex, power and truth

It is both ironic and sad in this week of the 20th anniversary of the apartheid government’s unbanning of all political organisations, that our newspaper headlines have once again been dominated by our third democratically elected president’s sex life.

As much as the government’s public relations teams have tried to minimise the reports of President Jacob Zuma having adulterous, unprotected sex with the daughter of a close friend, this matter has continued to make headlines at home and abroad. All attempts to shut down the debate by saying that it was purely a private matter between two consenting adults, or that it is ‘un-African’ and ‘disrespectful’ to publicly discuss an elder’s sex life have failed to stem the flood of comments in radio and newspaper forums.

Frankly, I take as much issue with the attempts to stifle the outrage as I do with the fact that our country’s leader has no qualms with saying one thing and then doing another (at last year’s Aids Day, for example, Zuma urged people not to have unprotected sex. He also apologised for having unprotected sex during his rape trial).

This is because it becomes very dangerous to insist that any one public figure is above criticism and challenge. Anyone who consents to taking on a public role of leadership, from a relatively small role such as a minister in a church, to a much bigger role such as the presidency of a country should know that they no longer have the luxury of a private life. This is because they are standing for something bigger than themselves, and have a responsibility to lead their people with integrity and in a way that promotes respect and dignity for all.

The people who put them in those positions of power should never absolve themselves of their own responsibilities, which is to keep their leadership accountable and honest. Even in a time of kings and absolute power, Nathan the prophet saw fit to challenge King David on his own sexual improprieties (2 Samuel 12).

Of course our leaders will make mistakes, and it would be unrealistic and even foolish of us to expect our leaders to be perfect. And once leaders make a mistake they should be treated with absolute grace and dignity (even if they have done something undignified themselves). Yet, at the same time they should be challenged and held responsible, because we have every right to expect our leaders to live by the principles they promote or were elected to uphold.

This is why the only ‘disrespect’ I find in this situation is to be told by others that we have no right to challenge our President because he is an elder and that this is not the African way. Please don’t misunderstand me, I believe we should deeply respect each other’s cultures and ways of being, but at the same time, please give the rest of us some respect. Should we really be expected to believe that it is cultural practice for a president to take to his bed his own godchild, or the daughter of an old friend? Does cultural practice really permit a president to publicly apologise for irresponsible sex, and then to later urge others to take wear condoms, but then when temptation arises to recommit the very same acts?

The Bible has a lot to say about power and its abuses. Running like a thread through all its teachings is the theme that with power comes both responsibility and accountability. Respecting someone else’s culture means listening to them, caring for them, and being willing to relate across differences, but it certainly does not mean we can never challenge or disagree with certain cultural practices. And yes, we can do the right thing the wrong way. We should never challenge each other disrespectfully, or without carefully considering each other’s positions and our own cultural blind spots, but the fact remains that without the principle of accountability balancing out the temptations of power we run the risk of regressing as a nation to what we were 20 years ago.

Robot Girlfriends, Sex and the Gospel

So have you heard about Roxxxy the sex robot? I wish I was kidding you around but sadly I’m not for Roxxxy is a recently invented life-size robotic girlfriend with artificial intelligence and flesh-like synthetic skin. Her creator Douglas Hines said that while she couldn’t vacuum or cook, she could “do almost anything else if you know what I mean” (all he left out there was the ‘nudge, nudge, wink, wink say no more’ bit).

Hines went on to explain that he considered his creation not only a recreational innovation but also an outlet for shy people, or those with sexual dysfunctions.
Well, we all know that sex sells, and so predictably Roxxxy the ‘easy’ robot will garner all kinds of reactions from all kinds of people. You may be reacting to this right now by wondering how a feature that purports to react to serious news can waste your time by including this bizarre and possibly tasteless article?

The thing is, Roxxxy is so symptomatic of everything this is wrong about sex in our modern society. For we live in a world that over-does, over-portrays and over-emphasises sex. This kind of news is actually directly relevant to all Christians because we live in a sex-obsessed (and as a result a deeply hurting) society, and so we find ourselves encountering ‘Roxxxy-like situations’, both personally and publicly, almost every day.

By including this article I am not resorting to cheap attempts to gain a good headline, but rather reacting to something which causes immense hurt and pain to many … an unhealthy and unbalanced understanding of sex. Tiger Woods is yet one more famous person to fall apart in this regard, and really, his story is played out much more privately for all sorts of people every day.

For the problem with our societies endless glorifying of bare flesh and sexual promiscuity is that it totally devalues God’s original intention in creating sex, and therefore also devalues us. It contributes to relational dysfunction, creates intimacy struggles and cheapens our fellow human beings.

It was C.S. Lewis who said that our problem is not that we think too much of sex, but that we think TOO LITTLE of it. What he meant by that is that although we give a lot of airtime to sex, we do it in such a way that cheapens it and the people involved.

The Gospels tell us stories where we find that Jesus reacted with great compassion and gentleness to sexual misdemeanours, perhaps because he understood that at their core was deep human brokenness and isolation. The irony is that sex is actually intended to counter this isolation, to be a means of building healthy intimacy.
It is vital for Christians to remember, that although the church has often been very disapproving of all things sexual (at one time even teaching that when a husband and wife made love the Holy Spirit left the room!), the overall vision of sex in Scripture is not at all disapproving. In fact, one of the real tragedies in Christian history has been the divorce of sexuality from spirituality. After all, we need to remember that God invented sex! The Bible itself actually has a very high view of sex.

God designed us to be sexual beings and that in the context of a committed and faithful relationship there would be for us a point of deep physical, spiritual and emotional connection. In the right place sex has a profoundly spiritual aspect to it.

Of course Roxxxie as an ‘outlet’ for the shy and sexually dysfunctional is only going to make things worse, and won’t in any way fulfill the deep need we have to be involved in a meaningful and giving relationship with another human being. But perhaps we should not only challenge the wrongness of this situation, but also offer a more attractive alternative.

The story of Roxxxy the sex robot breaks my heart and reminds me that the greatest challenge in situations like this is to use our voices to faithfully and proactively describe Scripture’s vision of the sheer beauty, the deep spirituality, and the profound intimacy of the sexual act as God originally created it to be.

Insult Politics

A couple of weeks back the Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, was attacked at the end of a political rally in Milan. His assailant hurled a statuette at Berlusconi breaking his nose and several teeth. This assault engendered shock across the world, and much soul-searching within Italian political circles. The obvious question being asked was - has the disintegration of the political debate and the increasing use of insults against political opponents created a “climate of hatred” in which conditions are ripe for the insults to develop into physical violence?

This issue should be one that all South Africans take seriously. Our own political front is awash with deeply personal verbal attacks and insults. Ironically enough, on Reconciliation Day last month, many papers headlined the spat between the ANC Youth League president Julius Malema and the SACP deputy general secretary Jeremy Cronin. Malema, in particular, is renowned for this sort of insult politics, and indeed on Reconciliation Day itself was quoted as deriding the SACP as “greedy yellow communists.”

So what does the Gospel have to say to this sort of insult politics? Well, for a start the teaching of Jesus would challenge us towards serious personal reflection. How often is this sort of ‘insult politics’ played out on a micro level within our own lives? How often have we spoken insults towards others? Whether it was aloud or quietly muttered, or even just thought, it doesn’t seem to make a difference to Jesus. In this way, have we contributed towards a “climate of hatred” within our own community, or perhaps even our own family?

If we are to contribute towards a better society we need to allow ourselves to be personally challenged as to how we speak and think of others and in doing so we can become part of creating and sustaining a “climate of love”. The Bible reminds us how powerful words are, and if we live in a way that recognizes that and uses the power of words positively, we can make a tremendous difference.

I am not advocating that we close down political and personal debates so as to minimize risk. Instead we should fearlessly tackle all kinds of issues, policies, divergent thoughts and opinions in a way that stimulates creative thinking and promotes tolerance of difference. This should be done in a spirit of gentle and humble grace for this was the way of Jesus, and lest we forget, it was a way modeled on the political scene by Nelson Mandela, and indeed is the very reason this country is fortunate enough to even celebrate a Reconciliation Day.

Politicians and Promises

January is synonymous with all kinds of promises and resolutions as we use the change of year to mentally shut the door on the past and throw open a new one filled with the possibilities of fresh starts.
Promises are also synonymous with politicians, with most of us long past truly believing that these promises will be meaningfully fulfilled. This is because we have been let down so often, leaving many of us more than a little cynical and disillusioned.

The award winning website PolitiFact.com even has an Obameter – a bar graph tracking the fulfillment of Obama’s campaign promises. The site informs us that out of 513 election promises made, Obama has so far kept 75 of them while compromising on 20 and breaking 9. The rest of the promises have so far seen no meaningful action, in other words nothing has been done about them yet.

Closer to home our own President Jacob Zuma promised Parliament in June that the government would create 500 000 jobs by the end of the year (2009). In a report they recently compiled, the Business Day confirmed that only 223 568 job opportunities out of the 500 000 had actually been created (see Business Day, 04/12/09). Of course it should also be remembered that in the meantime the recession caused a loss of a million jobs through this year, while the unemployment rate increased to 24.5%.

This only underlines why so many of us feeling even more cynical about politicians and their promises then we do about even our own new year resolutions. Yet, the question needs to be asked – is cynicism really an appropriate response for a Christian?

Of course, we need to be realistically aware that many politicians have proved themselves untrustworthy. And of course, in other areas of South African life there is much to be concerned about especially regarding poverty, crime and disease.
Despite all this, shouldn’t someone of faith look to be aware of the negative and yet not be coloured and shaped by it? As Eugene Peterson reminds us when we narrow our eyes in suspicion the world correspondingly narrows around us. Instead, we should be living with hope and a sense of wonder. Hope, because we know that despite the fallibility of all human beings, God IS in this world and working, and wonder, because we have been called to become a part of what God is doing.

Yes, there is no doubt about it that bad things do happen and people will let us down. Yet, at the same time, God is alive and on the move in this world and if we follow him we can live in the light and hope of that.