Is the Pope Catholic?

"Williams finds Pullman novel unpersuasive"

Is this one of the most ridiculous headlines going?  It would surely have made a much bigger headline if Rowan had found it persuasive!

The actual article is about the book "The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ" and Rowan's review of it. The full review can be found here, with others by Bishop Alan Wilson here, and the Church Times here.

The question that I want to explore is whether this might become one of those cultural events that Christians "have" to partake in so that we have a view!  So far this has happened to me with The Passion Of The Christ and The Da Vinci Code.  Neither were films that I particularly wanted to see, but in both cases I felt that I "ought" to see them.  I was nearly tempted by the same logic into getting a copy of this book, but the reviews that I read led me to believe that I would learn little more of use and so I have decided not to.

Would I do the same again with the films?  I actually found The Passion of the Christ particularly moving, and with hindsight would see it for my own sake - but the Da Vinci code?  No chance!

The Invention of Lying

I watched this the other day and it set me thinking about the value of lying.  The small white lies which grease the wheels of social intercourse.  Where do they fit in the overall scheme of things?  I found myself uncomfortable watching the film - was this level of honesty really good?  It worked in the film as everyone had grown up that way, but would it work in today's world where we expect a degree of "diplomacy"?

Of course the approach that we take in this world leaves us open to doubt - what does this person mean?  Do they really like me?  - but could we really live in a world where there was certainty - they hate me, they don't like my dress sense.  There is a small hint of this in the film when his secretary says to him "I loathed almost every minute that I worked for you" - suggesting that perhaps she hadn't been wholly truthful all that time.

However, what we can learn from the film is the ability not to worry about what others think and to deal with them politely, but as we want.  Brian Thorne spoke at our church recently and started by thanking people for their warm welcome, and saying that he hoped it would be as warm at the end, but if it wasn't it wasn't his responsibility - a little counselling joke - but one which is worth remembering.

Waiting for Godot

What do you make of the play?  If you don't know it and want a short summary try here or here for a longer one with lots of speculation on meaning!  My eldest daughter and her husband took me to see the one shown above as a present - for which I would like to thank them again!  I first saw it 30 years ago at the Cambridge Arts Theatre, and if memory serves me correctly (cos in this case Google doesn't!) Vladimir and Estragon were played by Max Wall and Bryan Pringle.

A number of different things came to mind about this - one was the different impact that the two versions had on me.   My recollection is that I found the older one better.  However, I am aware of revisiting a film I thought was brilliant at the same time and finding it less so second time around (and of course in that case the second opinion was right!).  I think that it had something to do with the fact that when I went to see the film it was because a group of us decided to go to the pics, and had no expectation of it, whereas the second time I had my memory of it being a good film.  With Godot first time around I was warned that it was awful (by someone who had studied it at A level) so again I went with lowered expectations, whereas on revisiting it I went with much higher expectations.  Funny how expectations can affect the experience!

In this version I was disappointed with Roger Rees, but was interested to discover that one of the reviews of the earlier version with Patrick Stewart made similar comments to those I would have made about Roger Rees - so perhaps it was a conscious decision by the director.

The wiki link earlier contains a mass of interpretation, but in the spirit of Post Modernism and "there is nothing outside the text" - subject of a previous post - what did we make of it?  We wondered whether the two halves were two consecutive days, one day replayed twice, or two days some time apart - without reaching a conclusion - but all of which give different interpretations to the meaning.  Then there was the despair of the waiting - Vladimir and Estragon could do nothing because they were waiting for Godot - what is it that I am waiting for that stops me doing things?  I found that for me it painted a bleak picture of humanity, one of meaninglessness.  Or perhaps I should say a bleak picture of meaninglessness, for although Vladimir and Estragon found their meaning in waiting for Godot it seemed a very negative purpose.