Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Eve Tushnet

Poor Little Rich Christian: Hulu’s Intermittently-Insightful “Rev.”

Last updated on: March 29, 2014 at 12:12 pm   by Eve Tushnet

Poor Little Rich Christian: Hulu’s Intermittently-Insightful “Rev.” 2014-03-29T12:12:59-04:00 Eve Tushnet

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

“First let’s say morning prayer. But let’s say it quietly, in case somebody here has got a hangover.”

That’s from the first episode of Rev., a Hulu series about an Anglican vicar in a tough London neighborhood, and it captures the show’s best side: a humorous acceptance of human weakness, combined with a seriousness about prayer. There’s a lot to love about Rev., so although I’m going to be critical, I want to start by highlighting what’s so intriguing and endearing about the show. Its first two seasons are free on Hulu and they’re worth checking out; I haven’t seen a show like this one before.

The show was conceived by James Wood (not that one!), who comes from a vicarry family, and there’s a definite familial-humor feel to it. There’s a low-rent realism about Rev. Adam Smallbone’s constant struggles with bureaucracy and coworkers, who pressure him to raise funds and put bums in seats, or criticize him for doing overly-Catholic liturgies. (Their term for this is “creeping up the candle,” which I adore: What’s at the top of a candle?) The serpentine Archdeacon is probably my favorite character, with his sleek black gloves and his insinuating smile. He’s got a definite tang of Francis Urquhart about him, or an unusually velvety Richard III.

There are some nice, sharp touches–my favorite is probably the use of drinking and smoking as class equalizers–and a strong theme of our inability to love others as well as they deserve. Adam is always shortchanging somebody. Even when he lies–and he’s very casual with the truth!–it’s because he’s a people-pleaser in a situation where pleasing anyone fully is simply impossible.

Perhaps the show’s most consistent theme is the humiliation and failure which attend any attempt to lead a fully Christian life. You guys already know me, so you know that I loved this stuff: Adam singing in his terrible tiny chalk-voice, Adam being all but thrown out of the Archdeacon’s car at a roundabout, Adam getting a bad online review. (“Why do I bother?” “Well you certainly didn’t that time.”) Adam not quite realizing the transparency of his crush on the C of E school’s headmistress. (In re her shoes: “They’re like little boots!”) Adam confessing, to the Bishop of London, that he’s fudged the truth about something important; Adam on ecstasy (long story), caterwauling, “I’m a leper tooooooo!” There’s a scene where Adam preaches, “I walk with the brokenness of the world,” as the local cassock-chaser practically has an orgasm in her seat; it’s hilarious but also quite moving.

But you’ll notice a refrain in that paragraph: Adam, Adam, Adam. The show’s biggest problem is that Adam is basically the only real character. Everyone else, even his wife Alex, exists solely as puppets in his psychodrama. And he’s a specific kind of privileged, self-pitying Christian which… which I admit I also am in many ways, but because the show never lets other characters be fully real, it makes self-pitying privileged Christianity the normative kind.

There’s a scene toward the very end of season two where my notes say, “Why isn’t [spoiler’s] partner at the big Christmas lunch? And why isn’t Alex upset that her father just told everyone [something most women would prefer to keep private]? Oh right, I know why.” It’s because the writers pretty obviously don’t think from within the worldview of those two characters. Gay people and women exist basically to demonstrate qualities of Adam’s life and personality. They don’t have independent points of view.

Colin, Adam’s homeless friend/irritant, is a partial exception: Sometimes he’s totally the Magical Homeless Man, full of sad hard-won insights; sometimes he’s Comedy Homeless Man who randomly switches religions because hey, it’s not like people like that really believe things; but sometimes he’s genuinely able to get us outside of Adam’s head. When he’s written badly the show becomes gross (the second episode is particularly bad about this: Colin gropes a girl at church, and the entire situation is 100% about Adam’s self-image) but when he’s written well he’s actually allowed to become an audience-identification character, which is lovely, fun, and radical.

There are various other problems: The show is weirdly totalizing in its view of How to Do Church (liberal Anglicanism is the only way, everybody else is tacky and evil, probably in that order) and it allows sincere statements of doubt, but only ironically-undercut statements of faith. I think some of the animus toward Catholics expressed by the characters is real–there’s a “jokes at other people’s expense” feel to a lot of that material. Which, fine, other people have churches, I get it, but it’s less fun to watch. Sometimes the vicars have sex!! stuff gets boringly, self-consciously edgy, although in fact that happens a lot less than I expected. And Adam’s missishness and self-pity do become wearying.

I’m pretty conflicted about this show. Its inability to escape Adam’s orbit creates both storytelling problems (other characters get warped to fit the needs of the story the writers want to tell about Adam) and spiritual problems. The show is more boring precisely because it is so fully, unshakably centered within the one point of view we already see a lot of: the harried, self-pitying white man unsure of his masculinity. But when the show is good–Adam’s hospital visit at the very end of season one; the episode about his ultra-successful archnemesis; almost all of his prayers–it’s poignant, funny, and sometimes convicting.

The first episode is one of the best (and the second is the worst–I’d simply skip it if I were you), so if you want to try Rev. out, just start at the beginning.

Mackerel-Snapping

and if my prayer go unanswered that's okay

England your England

humiliation

prepare for life in capitalist America: play Class Struggle--the Game

woman is the irony of the community

Previous Post



March 29, 2014

From "The New Evangelization"

Next Post



April 1, 2014 High Command: Burt Lancaster and Tony Curtis in (and on) "Trapeze"


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Art Best-Of Gay Catholic Whatnot Mackerel-Snapping self-obsessed Too much is never enough Uncategorized

Select a Month November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 August 2022 July 2022 May 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002 February 2002 January 2002


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does "Jordan" (as in Jordan River) mean?

Select your answer to see how you score.

To heal To open To anoint To descend

Related posts from Eve Tushnet

Catholic

Punch Drunk Love: I watch "Bottoms"

Eve Tushnet

Catholic

They Flew: I review Carlos Eire's new book...

Eve Tushnet

Catholic

When You Hear the Attack Warning: Short movie...

Eve Tushnet

Catholic

"A Better Outdoors Indoors": I'm in The Lamp

Eve Tushnet

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic

Rejecting Doom: Christian Hope And Human Action

Christianity is a religion of hope. We are to have hope and...

It’s What Comes From Within Which Matters

One of the most difficult things for us to understand is why...

Why I Choose the Eucharist Over the Sermon

Choose the Eucharist, Not the Sermon What are we supposed to get...

5 Design Elements Found in Spiritually Rooted Homes

Putting Spirituality Into Home Decor Our homes are more than our living...

Credo: A Story of God Told with the...

About 10 years ago, I began to imagine a personal "Credo" that...

The Anatomy of Divine Revelation in Catholic Thought

The claim that God has made Himself known to human beings is...

view all Catholic blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube