Jeff Grim talks about a book which aims to show how decades of hatred between northern and southern states drove us to a civil war. “Fleming makes a convincing argument that the fringe elements (fanatics in his words) in both regions pushed the country toward a civil war. He also argues that the animosity began decades before the Civil War.”
Perhaps slavery was so contentious an issue it could not be civilly discussed in 19th Century America.
A strong Christian movie reviewers, critic, take-down artist (however you want to think of it) Steven D. Greydanus has written about homosexual themes in Disney’s latest fantasy, Frozen. He didn’t like the movie much without this part, but he makes several points on what he thinks is subversive in this movie. He is probably right on a few points, but overall I disagree. I don’t think the Oaken is a gay man with his husband and family in the sauna, and I wish Disney people would step up to settle the issue (though I doubt they will).
Steven writes, “And yet, in this case the filmmakers have walked that line really well: so well that the pro-gay themes have gone right over the heads of countless adult Christian viewers, many of whom have embraced Frozen as resonating powerfully with Christian themes.”
Frozen by superstarwordgirl on deviantART
He has since published his response to suggestions Frozen is a marvelous Christian parable of sorts. “The common crux of most of these religious readings of Frozen,” he says, “is the climactic, self-sacrificial act by which Anna saves Elsa before being restored to life — an act that, according to Frozen’s theologically minded enthusiasts, recalls the saving death and resurrection of Jesus.”
But this is common in fairy tales, where people are often saved from death or near-death curses.
Steven asks, “Who is really saved in that climactic sacrificial act, Elsa or Anna?
For a bit about the motivations behind the popular song, “Let It Go,” the writers talk about it here. “… she was exalted at her coronation as being so perfect and wonderful. But the moment that Elsa revealed that she was a little bit odd, everyone turned on her and then chased her out of the kingdom.”Anna sacrifices herself to save Elsa from a fleeting, mundane threat: a treacherous enemy lurks behind Elsa with drawn sword to cut her down. In principle, this is a trivial threat to Elsa — one that, with her powers, she could easily ward off if she were alerted to it.
By contrast, Anna is in far more serious, profound and thematically important physical peril. Anna’s heart has turned to ice, and the ice is insidiously spreading through her whole body, swallowing and devouring her humanity.
It’s worth noting that the original Hans Christian Andersen story “The Snow Queen,” the nominal inspiration for Frozen, climaxes in a scene strikingly similar to the one at the end of Frozen: a heroine weeping over the frozen body of a victim whose heart has turned to ice. In Anderson, however, the frozen victim’s icy heart is thawed by the hot tears of the other person’s love.
A strong Christian movie reviewers, critic, take-down artist (however you want to think of it) Steven D. Greydanus has written about homosexual themes in Disney’s latest fantasy, Frozen. He didn’t like the movie much without this part, but he makes several points on what he thinks is subversive in this movie. He is probably right on a few points, but overall I disagree. I don’t think the Oaken is a gay man with his husband and family in the sauna, and I wish Disney people would step up to settle the issue (though I doubt they will).
Steven writes, “And yet, in this case the filmmakers have walked that line really well: so well that the pro-gay themes have gone right over the heads of countless adult Christian viewers, many of whom have embraced Frozen as resonating powerfully with Christian themes.”
Frozen by superstarwordgirl on deviantART
He has since published his response to suggestions Frozen is a marvelous Christian parable of sorts. “The common crux of most of these religious readings of Frozen,” he says, “is the climactic, self-sacrificial act by which Anna saves Elsa before being restored to life — an act that, according to Frozen’s theologically minded enthusiasts, recalls the saving death and resurrection of Jesus.”
But this is common in fairy tales, where people are often saved from death or near-death curses.
Steven asks, “Who is really saved in that climactic sacrificial act, Elsa or Anna?
For a bit about the motivations behind the popular song, “Let It Go,” the writers talk about it here. “… she was exalted at her coronation as being so perfect and wonderful. But the moment that Elsa revealed that she was a little bit odd, everyone turned on her and then chased her out of the kingdom.”Anna sacrifices herself to save Elsa from a fleeting, mundane threat: a treacherous enemy lurks behind Elsa with drawn sword to cut her down. In principle, this is a trivial threat to Elsa — one that, with her powers, she could easily ward off if she were alerted to it.
By contrast, Anna is in far more serious, profound and thematically important physical peril. Anna’s heart has turned to ice, and the ice is insidiously spreading through her whole body, swallowing and devouring her humanity.
It’s worth noting that the original Hans Christian Andersen story “The Snow Queen,” the nominal inspiration for Frozen, climaxes in a scene strikingly similar to the one at the end of Frozen: a heroine weeping over the frozen body of a victim whose heart has turned to ice. In Anderson, however, the frozen victim’s icy heart is thawed by the hot tears of the other person’s love.
Eric Christensen lists 10 things he rather not see in new fantasy, such as The Chosen One (The Special), dark lords, limitless magic, and uniformity among races. I would add blind seers to this list. What do you think of these things? Would you add or subtract anything?
Joanne Harris has released a fantasy novel, or is it a memoir, telling the story of Loki’s rise and fall in his own voice. Harris says she stayed close the source material, even though Loki has a modern voice. “Because he’s the ultimate unreliable narrator – and because I knew I’d enjoy writing his voice. I’ve made it very modern because Loki seems to me to be a very modern anti-hero – flawed, morally ambivalent, yet charismatic.”
I’ll bet he never made on SatNiLiv either.
Fair trade labeling is intended to assure you that the coffee or other product you are buying has been certified as a quality product made in an environment that respects its workers. Usually bean farmers are poor, so if you believe you are helping them earn a “fair” or better-than-market wage, then you feel good about yourself.
But this book, The Fair Trade Scandal, argues that helping the poor isn’t the result, particularly in Africa. “The growth in sales for fair trade products has been dramatic in recent years,” it says, “but most of the benefit has accrued to the already wealthy merchandisers at the top of the value chain rather than to the poor producers at the bottom.” The author, Ndongo Sylla, is a researcher for the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation.
The Acton Institute blog touches on the problems with fair trade. “In some cases,” Sarah Stanley writes, “fair trade growers have been known to sell lower quality crops in the fair trade market and then sell higher quality coffee beans in the non-fair trade market for a competitive price. A guaranteed price means that growers do not have to guarantee quality.”
One solution for coffee drinkers is to support active business owners, like Ryan Knapp of Madcap Coffee.
“We have been intentional on the fact that we are not going to have a label to say what our coffee is as much as we are going to be a brand that is committed to great business practices.” He goes on, “Fair trade, a certification doesn’t really tell the whole story…Fair Trade isn’t the best option always for producers.” What is the best option for producers? According to Knapp, “the big piece of it is the transparency aspect and knowing exactly where our dollar is going and being able to trace that down to people that are actually growing the coffee, farming the coffee.”
Aaron Armstrong talks about the word heresy and how a popular author is probably misusing it. Heresy is a serious matter. To use the word to mean rebel, outsider, or maverick doesn’t help when we have to talk about actual heresy.
Several days ago, Nick Harrison listed five points of writing advice he labeled heresy. Ok, he didn’t, but he did not like them. Now he offers five things he likes. For example, he says, “If you write fiction, please remember that you’re not just telling a story or passing along information. Your goal is to emotionally move your reader.”
For more writing fun, Chip Macgregor describes several things editors love (by which I mean hate) when they read a manuscript. Multiple fonts? Excess commas? Great stuff. Also this: ‘For some reason, Number-Impaired People will make an outline that reads, “First,” followed by “Two,” then “C,” and then “4.” (Or, occasionally, “13.”)’
Because you, gentle reader, are the salt of the earth, the voice of reason, the splash of confidence upon the shaven face, I offer you this video for your comment:
I didn’t see this video until after some commentators complained about it, and I’m disappointed in them. This is beautiful. How does this undermine the country? I think some people have political worldviews that taint everything they see in negative colors.
Had they watched this ad instead, perhaps they would be less outraged. I take that back. I think these people live on the Isle of Outrage.
UPDATE: Bell’s Whisky South Africa Ad is beautiful. Continue reading America, Land of Language
I’ve always had a good impression of Malcolm Gladwell’s books, but after reading David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and The Art of Battling Giants, I want to find Blink, Outliers, and all the others. They are bound to be just as insightful and transformational as this one.
Gladwell’s two-fold premise is that some perceived disadvantages are actually advantages in the right context and vice versa. He frames the book around the battle between David and Goliath. The army of Israel was terrified of the gigantic warrior Goliath, who could probably spear two men at once. Who could win a sword fight with a man like this? But David, inspired with a confidence from the Lord, changed the battle plan.
I was skeptical of this description at first, as you may be, but Gladwell backs it up beautifully. Goliath was prepared for a hand-to-hand fight. His arrogance probably kept him from considering potential threats like David’s sling, and his eye-sight may have been pretty bad due to the condition, pituitary macroadenoma, that made him a giant (height: “six cubits and a span”). One scholar suggests Goliath’s shield bearer, who stood in front of him when they first met David, was actually a guide, because the warrior’s sight was that bad.
The endnotes in this book hold many cool details like these, but the theme of the story is that Goliath’s considerable advantages on the battlefield became disadvantages with new rules of engagement. The same can be seen in many other situations:
Gladwell tells many fascinating stories about the advantages of difficulties and the limits of advantages. Continue reading David and Goliath: The Advantages of Disadvantages
Last month, we talked about the place or lack thereof for language, violence, and sex in Christian fiction. Mike Duran was our source for that post, and now Mike says he has “learned of another fictional archetype that is, apparently, off-limits for mainstream Christian fiction — zombies.”
The reason is that a Christian worldview doesn’t allow for the undead. Since zombies can’t exist, then fictional zombies shouldn’t be in our stories.
Mike says, “Forcing fiction to neatly fit your theology is a losing proposition… at least, if creative storytelling is your aim.”
I agree with Mike. I wonder what imaginative cliches Christian fiction readers/publishers accept as normal but are just as unChristian (in worldview terms) as zombies and other creatures of the dead?
What do you think?
Other reading: Loren Eaton’s post on this question, “Is it legitimate to discover joy in works primarily intended to arouse fear?”