I heard the author talk about the ideas in his book on Brian Kilmeade’s show this morning. He was the one who broke the story on Obama’s long-time radical pastor. That’s what starts this video. Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal – America’s Racial Obsession
Infamy
I attend a Lutheran congregation in north Minneapolis, one that belongs to the church body I work for. It’s large but not huge. The senior pastor has made himself visible in the media for a number of years as a critic of the liberal church, and of modern trends such as universalism, women’s ordination, higher criticism of the Bible, and the normalization of homosexuality. He is a single man.
Last night, while watching local news on television, I discovered that he’d been “outed” as a homosexual.
He was not discovered in a “gay” bar. He was not discovered having sex with another man in a public rest room.
According to the news accounts I’ve seen (emanating from liberal sources) he was discovered attending a support and accountability group in a Roman Catholic church. He was speaking honestly, to men he trusted, about his struggles, slips, and temptations.
In other words, he was doing precisely what people on our side of the argument say a man in his situation ought to do. He is the very opposite of a hypocrite.
On the basis of the accounts I’ve read, the “journalist” who produced the story infiltrated this accountability group, lied about his purposes, and then broke the promise of confidentiality he made to get in.
The television story pretended to be a high-minded think piece about whether it’s ever appropriate to “out” someone against their wishes.
I don’t believe that was the real purpose of the story. I believe it was to splash my pastor’s picture all over TV screens in our state, with a metaphorical scarlet letter on his chest.
My pastor has my full support, and my prayers. God bless him, and all godly men in his situation.
Book illustration pratfalls
Well, that’s serendipity. Phil links to a source of good book illustration, and I just found a source of bad science fiction book covers. Of which there is apparently an inexhaustible supply. Thanks to Loren Eaton of I Saw Lightning Fall for the tip.
I haven’t gone through the entire inventory, so I don’t know if they’ve included a particular cover that even its publisher admitted, in the cold light of the morning after, was probably a mistake: Continue reading Book illustration pratfalls
Book Illustration Prints
Looking for prints from great illustrated books of your past, like this one of The Flying Dutchman by Graham Coton? Look no further.
Book News: Communists & Cupboards
Blog friend (but dire enemy of Lars Forkbeard) Hunter Baker says he “agreed to do an essay on The Communist Manifesto for John Mark Reynolds new Great Books reader.”
Beloved Pictures has announced it is developing an adaptation of N.D. Wilson’s “100 Cupboards” trilogy. Wilson is also adapting C.S. Lewis’ The Great Divorce and appears to have a head of steam behind it. According to this article, The Screwtape Letters has been “developing” for several years. I wonder if studios are balking at its Christianity.
How do we know if we don't know?
To really write properly on this subject, I should have read all five articles, but I only read the first in this series linked by Grim at Grim’s Hall. It’s about scientists who are studying the mystery, not only of not knowing, but of not knowing that we don’t know certain things. In other words, problems we don’t solve because we’re not aware of any problem—even when we have to live with the consequences of not solving it.
DAVID DUNNING: Well, my specialty is decision-making. How well do people make the decisions they have to make in life? And I became very interested in judgments about the self, simply because, well, people tend to say things, whether it be in everyday life or in the lab, that just couldn’t possibly be true. And I became fascinated with that. Not just that people said these positive things about themselves, but they really, really believed them. Which led to my observation: if you’re incompetent, you can’t know you’re incompetent.
How Do You Find the Good Stuff?
Laura Miller of Salon.com says if the predictions of a wonderful world of self-publishing materialize, average readers will have a very large pile of poor writing to weed through. She describes reading The Slush Pile, that growing mound of unsolicited manuscripts that some publishers assign to an editorial peon.
Miller writes that we on the outside of publishing should fear what we don’t know: “Civilians who kvetch about the bad writing of Dan Brown, Stephenie Meyer or any other hugely popular but critically disdained novelist can talk as much trash as they want about the supposedly low standards of traditional publishing. They haven’t seen the vast majority of what didn’t get published . . .”
In a world where any manuscript can be published and placed with online retailers, readers will suffer. Reading bad writing can hurt. “[I]nstead of picking up every new manuscript with an open mind and a tiny nibbling hope, you learn to expect the worst. Because almost every time, the worst is exactly what you’ll get.”
Great Divorce to be filmed
The Thinklings report that there’s a deal to film C.S. Lewis’ The Great Divorce. The people who made “The Stoning of Soraya M.” are part of the project. The links are a rabbit hunt, so I’ll just link to their post.
I have a hard time thinking of a more naturally un-cinematic novel than The Great Divorce.
But they have my good wishes.
Interview on The Secret of Kells.
Jeffrey Overstreet writes, “I finally saw The Secret of Kells. Wow. I haven’t been so hypnotized and enthralled by animation in a very long time. It’s remarkable how, in this era of increasingly lifelike digital animation and 3D, something that seems handmade can still work the most powerful magic.”
He interviews critic Steven D. Greydanus, because he’s troubled by the film. “Had I just watched a film about The Book of Kells that never once acknowledged what is written on the book’s pages?”
We Love You the Way You Are (Sort of)
Here are five things that we think should never change in journalism.