Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Looking Closer

Home
Religious Music & Entertainment
Browser, 6/19: Veith on the Sex & the City hubbub; Image and the Diving Bell; New World quesadillas!

Browser, 6/19: Veith on the Sex & the City hubbub; Image and the Diving Bell; New World quesadillas!

Last updated on: March 27, 2013 at 4:43 pm by Jeffrey Overstreet

Browser, 6/19: Veith on the Sex & the City hubbub; Image and the Diving Bell; New World quesadillas! 2013-03-27T16:43:47-06:00 Jeffrey Overstreet

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.

The Browser: News & links to raise your eyebrows & furrow your brow.

–

Gene Edward Veith weighs in on the Sex and the City hubbub

Gene Edward Veith, after raising questions that threw fuel on an already vigorous conversation (debate? brouhaha? hubbub?) over Christianity Today’s review of Sex and the City, has finally weighed in with his own perspective.

And I’m grateful. I’ve followed Veith’s work for years and knew he would respond with insight.

Can we move on now?

Can we put that disrespectful, false headline behind us and try to show some respect for the ministry of Christianity Today?

Can Camerin Courtney go back out in public now without a bulletproof vest?

Can I go on without people claiming that I’ve declared a deep love for porn? (No, apparently that’s going to continue, judging from the latest comments on Veith’s first post. God knows me, so I guess I shouldn’t worry about the ridiculous version of me that some of those folks have invented out of thin air.)

For what it’s worth, this feels like the closest we’ll come to “closure” on this argument. What a shame.

I’m declaring a hiatus from posting comments about the whole debacle.

Better to let the ranters go on attacking a review that doesn’t exist, and calling us names for reasons they’ve imagined, somewhere else. I’ve got better things to do then answer folks who don’t listen, and who didn’t read closely in the first place.

I’ve already received a huge rant today from a reader, regarding how wicked the makers of Sex and the City are, and the evils of their motives. That’s not the issue. Plenty of wicked, worldly people have, despite their public declarations, and in spite of their subversive intentions, created worthwhile art. Woody Allen openly denounces God and affirms amorality, but his films are worthwhile explorations of ethics, good, and evil. I’m not going to be distracted by any revelations about the motives of the filmmakers. I’m going to focus on the art itself. If we judged art by examining the flaws and rash statements of the artist, The Passion of the Christ would have been thrown out.

And you know what? I’m *still* not a Sex and the City fan. I only defend the right of another Christian to discover meaning there, and to discuss why the show appeals to so many viewers. Heck, I know someone who came to Christ because of something he thought about while watching The Love Bug. Even the shoddiest storytelling may inspire us to a worthwhile discussion. (But that doesn’t excuse us from pointing out what is badly done. That’s why I appreciate Courtney’s cautions about the film’s stupid sex scenes.)

The tone of the whole debate was unfortunate, and if I had it to do over again, I’d probably go with Christianity Today‘s own decision — to just go on with their good work, and let the false accusations collapse on their own. If I responded to all of the sneering put-downs that I receive from Christians, I’d collapse from exhaustion. One thing I’ve learned in my decade-plus years of reviewing movies… Christians can write meaner hate mail than anybody. And when Christians persecute Christians with public condemnation, it’s the worst kind of ugly. If Ted Slater has decided to stand by his headline, which he himself called “effectively shocking,” he’ll get the audience he deserves.

Let’s put it behind us.

–

“Art is the denial of death…”

At Image, A.G. Harmon considers The Diving Bell and the Butterfly.

“Art is a denial of death,” Schnabel has said of the film’s meaning. But surely that’s because art is born of souls, which do not die, and to which art testifies. All lofty commonplaces aside, if souls die, art dies too — in the diving bell.

–

Terrence Ma-licking Good!

Here’s a great idea for a blog… food inspired by movies! Try these New World quesadillas!

Previous Post

June 18, 2008

Reader Mailstrom, 6/18: "Your reviews are no longer of value to the Christian community."

Next Post

June 19, 2008 Reader Mailstrom, 6/19

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Blog Bloggers on "Through a Screen Darkly" Browser Coming Soon Endorsements Fiction Books Film Forum Film Reviews Inspirations Interviews Journal Kindlings Muse Movie buzz Music Reviews Non-Fiction Books radio Reviewers on "Through a Screen Darkly" The Auralia Thread Through a Screen Darkly Through a Screen Darkly - Bonus Materials Top 10 (or 20 or 100) lists Uncategorized

Select a Month 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 July 2003 May 2003 March 2003 September 1999

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What animal did David protect his sheep from as a young shepherd?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Wolf and fox Lion and bear Horse and boar Eagle and serpent