Tuesday, March 30, 2010

The State of First Things, April 2010

Next in a continuing series

I. Must Read

1) Armond White, "Do Movie Critics Matter?
White is the chairman of the New York Film Critics Circle, and this was a speech he gave at their annual awards banquet, at which, as the author's note states, "With movie luminaries such as Meryl Streep, George Clooney, Jeff Bridges, Mo'Nique, Kathyrn Bigelow, and others in the audience, White's remarks were met with stony silence." That description alone made the article worth reading. The article is an argument for the importance of movie criticism, which is interesting because it answers an important question--why bother having movie critics? Most movie criticism, as White notes, is simply a poor substitute for film advertising. There is not much movie criticism for sophisticated thinkers. (And no, what passes for film criticism in the Academy doesn't count.) Good movie criticism would require art appreciation, not the fan-boy enthusiasm for movies, yet few movie critics are well-versed enough in the liberal arts to offer thoughtful criticism. I really noticed this when I read a year or so ago, the Library of America's volume American Movie Criticism, which was a best of movie criticism from the earliest 20th century until today. It was really pretty interesting--some of the critics in that volume were literate, thoughtful and generally quite perceptive. It was possible to imagine a substantive intellectual disagreement with those authors--something beyond "I liked that movie more or less than the critic did." I assume thoughtful movie critics still exist out there, but they don't regularly show up in any forum I generally read--though I do like Joe Morgenstern in the Wall Street Journal. (James Bowman also reviews movies and puts the reviews on his web page--and I do like James Bowman, but I don't regularly visit his page to read the reviews--maybe I should. Come to think of it, maybe he has an e-mail service where he e-mails the reviews when they are posted--I'll have to check sometime.)

2. David Novak, "Why are Jews Chosen?"
Easily the best article I have ever read arguing for the importance of preserving a Jewish identity. The purpose of the Jews is to preserve the Torah; if the Jews died out, the keepers of the Torah die out. Since God clearly wants the Torah to be preserved, it is vitally important that Jews maintain their identity. Now, I disagree with the premise of that, of course--the Torah has been completed in the work of Jesus--but if you do not accept that Christ was the Messiah, then the logic of Novak's argument is very good.


II. Worth Reading

1. John Lamont, "The Prophet Motive"
This is a decent review of the economics of religion literature. I had read most of the material the article discusses before, but the article has a good survey of that literature. The punch line--churches that have a rigorous theology and high expectations are thriving; churches that have watered down the theology and expectations are dying. Why? People who attend church want something; the watered down churches aren't actually offering anything at all.

2. Eric Cohen, "The God-Seeking Animal"
This is a review of Leon Kass' work. Leon Kass is interesting, so reviewing his work is inherently interesting, but the article is only OK. The main issue for discussion is how humans alone of all the animals can use their bodies in thoughtfully purposeful ways. That quick summary sounds pretty obvious and lame, but the article, insofar as it is summarizing Kass, has some interesting observations. For example:

"When we see an outstanding athlete in action, we do not see—as we do in horse racing—a rational agent riding or whipping a separate animal body. . . . So attuned is the body, and so harmonious is it with the heart and mind, that—in the best instance—the whole activity of the athlete appears effortlessly to flow from a unified and undivided being. At such moments the athlete experiences and displays something like the unity of doer and deed one observes in other animals, but with this difference: For humans, such a unity is an achievement. A great sprinter may run like a gazelle and a great boxer may fight like a tiger, but one would never mistake their harmony of body and soul for the brute instinct that spurs an animal toward flight or fight."

3. Robert Chase, "Science Friction"
This is a review of the history of religion in science fiction. A friend of mine, Al, once gave a talk about the same thing, and Al's conclusions were much the same as Chase's. Religion is making some interesting inroads into the science fiction genre. While it would seem that science fiction as a genre is antithetical to religion, there is actually a surprising amount of religious insight and respect for religious devotion throughout the genre. In this realm, it is pretty obvious that science and religion can interact quite well. Now, if only we could drop the presumption that they clash outside of literature.

4. Jill Colvin, "Down for the Count"
A report on the 2010 Census, which is shaping up to be a disaster. The 2010 Census may get nowhere close to being and actual count of the population--and that presents some very interesting Constitutional questions. Should representation be based on the Census results (which is constitutionally mandated) even if we know the results are inaccurate?


Oh, and just to register the normal state: Joseph Bottom's end of the issue remarks were solid, as always. In particular, he has a nice explanation of the decision to include poetry in First Things when it started--the general reader was no longer encountering modern poetry anywhere, so First Things decided to fight against the tide by regularly including poetry.

No comments:

Post a Comment