“The Narcissism Epidemic” … (part 2)

In their book, The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement, authors Jean Twenge and Keith Campbell argue that narcissistic behavior is on the rise in our society.  But what does that mean?  How can we measure what is largely an interior belief?  Is there a way to actually quantify “an inflated view of oneself?”

Many psychologists believe that there is.  In the late 1970s, two professors, working out of UC-Berkley, developed the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI).  The most common version of this inventory pairs 40 narcissistic statements with 40 non-narcissistic statements.  The respondent is then asked to choose which statement best describes his or her personality.  For your own amusement (or edification), click the picture below and take the test.  Don’t worry, it’ll only take two minutes; and I’ll be right here when you get back.

Well, what did you think?  Kind of interesting, wasn’t it?  Now that you know how it works, I want to show you a graph that displays the results of college students, who took the test, from 1982 to 2006.   Here it is:

Now remember, a score between 12 and 15 is considered to be average.  A score around 18 is how a celebrity typically views him or herself; and a score that is 20 or above is considered to be “narcissistic.”   In order to be diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), a person would score above 20 on this index and would possess five or more of the following traits.

• Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
• Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
• Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
• Requires excessive admiration
• Has a very strong sense of entitlement, e.g., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
• Is exploitative of others, e.g., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
• Lacks empathy, e.g., is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
• Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
• Regularly shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

At present, only 1 in 4 college students are technically “narcissistic.”  But if the trend continues to progress at its current rate, we are looking at a future – only 20 years from now! – where the “average” student will live their day-to-day life as an operational narcissist.

 

Thanksgiving, Indulgence and “The Hunger Games” Triology … (part 3)

SPOILER ALERT:  I’ve been told I need to add a spoiler alert to these sorts of posts.  I’ve never really understood this practice, as I’ve always assumed that if I am reading something, I am going to learn something about the subject at hand.  Nevertheless, if you thought you were going to read this post and learn nothing about The Hunger Games, you have now been warned that this is not likely to be the case.  Tread carefully.

Two weeks ago, I received my copy of The Hunger Games trilogy.  With all three books currently scaling the heights of the bestseller list and with the first of the films due to be released this spring, I was curious to know what all the fuss was about.  Much to my surprise, these books have not only been page-turningly-good, they have also provided many unexpected critiques of a culture that is in desperate need of such criticism.  If you would like to read the first two posts, I include them here for your reading pleasure.

The Hunger Games Trilogy … (part 1)

The Hunger Games Trilogy … (part 2)

Today, I’d like to talk about the culture of indulgence.  While most of us are somewhat uncomfortable talking about this issue, there is no question that America is an indulgent nation, unparalleled in its ability to meet every whim and passing fancy of its population.  From an annual expenditure of $166 billion spent on alcohol[1] to $41 billion spent on pets,[2] we have the economic capacity to pander to our desires in a way that no country has ever possessed.  But how many of us consider the food we take in to be an extravagance?  According to Forbes magazine, one of the five most expensive “addictions” faced by Americans is the addiction to food.  Last week, we celebrated a national holiday by spending $875 million buying enough turkey to give everyone who was celebrating three pounds of meat.  According to the Center for Disease Control,[3] 34.4% of adults older than twenty are technically overweight; while another 33.9% of the adult population is technically obese.  So altogether, almost 70% of the adult American population is gorging on food, which in turn costs us $107 billion on treatment for heart disease, osteoarthritis, hypertension, gall bladder disease and cancer.[4]

Now consider this timely passage from Catching Fire, the second novel in The Hunger Games trilogy.  The context is a feast that has been thrown in honor of the Games’ champion and the novel’s heroin, Katniss Everdeen.

Every table present new temptations, and even on my restricted one-taste-per-dish regimen, I begin filling up quickly.   I pick up a small roasted bird, bite into it, and my tongue floods with orange sauce.  Delicious.  But I make Peeta eat the remainder because I want to keep tasting things, and the idea of throwing away food, as I see so many people doing so casually, is abhorrent to me.  After about ten tables, I’m stuffed, and we’ve only sampled a small number of the dishes available.  Just then, my prep team descends on us.  They’re nearly incoherent between the alcohol they’ve consumed and their ecstasy at being at such a grand affair.

“Why aren’t you easting?” asks Octavia.

“I have been, but I can’t hold another bite,” I say.  They all laugh as if that’s the silliest thing they’ve ever heard.

“No one lets that stop them!” says Flavius.  They lead us over to a table that holds tiny stemmed wineglasses filled with clear liquid.  “Drink this!”

Peeta picks one up to take a sip and they lose it.

“Not here!” shrieks, Octavia.

“You have to do it in there,” says Venia, pointing to doors that lead to the toilets.  “Or you’ll get it all over the floor!”

“Peeta looks at the glass again and puts it together. “You mean this will make me puke?”

My prep team laughs hysterically.  “Of course, so you can keep eating,” says Octavia.  “I’ve been in there twice already.  Everyone does it, or else how would you have any fun at the feast?”

I’m speechless, staring at the pretty little glasses and all they imply.[5]

At its core, The Hunger Games, Catching Fire and Mockingjay are all novels of political dissent; and as such, they have to paint a society that is worthy of rebelling against.  If they fail at that task, then the actions of the heroin and her friends are ultimately meaningless, or worse yet, wicked.  So what kind of society is it that Collins deems to be degraded and worthy of overthrow?  A society that is so overly decadent that gluttony is casually overlooked by the wealthy and privileged.  When you consider the fact that Collin’s intentionally set her novel in the ruins of North America, her critique could be more explicit or plain.

What do you think?  Do you think that the indulgences of the rich are ample grounds for political revolution?  What if their decadence come at the expense of those that scratch out meager lives in grinding, degrading poverty?

One last question … How do you think your answer might differ from the answer of someone living in abject poverty?

---

[1]
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Forbes/The5MostExpensiveAddictions.aspx

[2]
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_32/b4045001.htm

[3]
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/overwt.htm

[4]
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Forbes/The5MostExpensiveAddictions.aspx

[5] Collins, Suzanne. Catching Fire (New York: Scholastic Press, 2009), 78-79.

 

“The Narcissism Epidemic” … (part 1)

Over the next few weeks, I will be sharing various observations gleaned from a wonderful, recent study entitled, The Narcissism Epidemic.  According to dictionary.com, “narcissism” is “an inordinate fascination with oneself.”  From the same source, an “epidemic” is an affliction that affects a “disproportionately large number of individuals within a population.”  So in titling their book as they have, Jean M. Twenge and W. Keith Campbell are suggesting that a disproportionate segment of our society is currently suffering from a distorted sense of self-image that is marked by a pronounced fascination with one’s own being.

Now, to get us going, let me offer you two brief insights gleaned from the first chapter of the book.  Then I want to ask a question.

• From the 1980s to the present, the percentage of Americans possessing Narcissitic personality traits has risen as fast as percentage of society that struggles with obesity.
• In 2006, 1 out of every 4 college students possessed a majority of the traits listed in a standard psychological profile of narcissism.

So here is my question.  Why are we, as Americans, concerned about obesity, but relatively ignorant and/or unconcerned about narcissism?  

The Narcissism Epidemic is currently available through amazon.com for $10.87.

 

Democracy in Action …

This morning, two images appeared at the top of the CNN.com newsfeed.  Has me wondering: is this Egypt in 50 years or the United States in 50 years?

Crowds swarming in Egypt for the right to be politically free.

Crowds swarming in the United States for the right to find a "great deal."

 

“The Hunger Games” Trilogy … (part 2)

SPOILER ALERT:  I’ve been told I need to add a spoiler alert to these sorts of posts.  I’ve never really understood this practice, as I’ve always assumed that if I am reading something, I am going to learn something about the subject at hand.  Nevertheless, if you thought you were going to read this post and learn nothing about The Hunger Games, you have now been warned that this is not likely to be the case.  Tread carefully.

Picking up from yesterdays post, “The Hunger Games” Trilogy … (part 1), I’d like to continue this discussion on The Hunger Games by asking a few more questions of the text.  Let’s start with what does it mean to be human?  In other words, does our status as human beings endow us with a certain dignity?  Or are we like other animals?  Do we have moral responsibilities?  Or are we free to be whatever we choose from a moral perspective?

Once again, the answer to these questions surprised me.  I would argue that Collins actually holds humanity in fairly high regard.  While she is clearly concerned about our ability to descend into power-struggles in which we oppress our fellow man, she also paints this descent as being the descent of a few, not the descent of the masses.  The vast majority of humanity continues to struggle for survival in relatively tight-knit communities that seems to genuinely care for one another.  Now, is the “tight-knit”nature of the communities a genuine affection for one another, or is it a closeness brought on by the mutual need for survival.  That remains to be seen.

Nevertheless, humanity is shown as having a moral center.  Consider this conversation held by Peeta and Katniss, shortly before they enter the arena.

“Thinking about your family,” he asks.

“No,” I admit a bit guiltily.  “All I can do is wonder aobut tomorrow.  Which is pointless, of course.”  In the light from below, I can see his face now, the awkward way he holds his bandaged hands.  “I really am sorry about your hands.”

“It doesn’t matter, Katniss,” he says.  “I’ve never been a contender in these Games anyway.”

“That’s no way to be thinking,” I say.

“Why not?  It’s true.  My best hope is to not disgrace myself and …” He hesitates.

“And what?” I say.

“I don’t know how to say it exactly.  Only … I want to die as myself.  Does that make any sense?” he asks.  I shake my head.  How could he die as anyone but himself?  “I don’t want them to change me in there.  Turn me into some kind of monster that I’m not.”

I bite my lip, feeling inferior.  While I’ve been ruminating on the availability of trees, Peeta has been struggling with how to maintain his identity.  His purity of self.  “Do you mean you won’t kill anyone?”

As you can see, Peeta is troubled by concerns greater than his own survival.  And while Katniss doesn’t necessarily understand this, you can tell from the author’s writing that she sees this as a deficiency in her heroin’s character.  As the story progresses, this is confirmed several times as Katniss pauses to engage in incredibly humane acts even though such acts endanger her own well-being.  Being human involves more than merely surviving against the odds.  Being human is an active choice to live in a way that refuses to be dragged down by the immoral actions of a depraved society.

All of this naturally leads to the final set of two, inter-related questions. First, how do we know what is right and what is wrong?  Second, what is history about?  Where is it going?

As one would expect in a novel of this nature, moral questions abound.  But was noticeably absent at every turn is a grounding for the moral choices that were made.  While Collins unmistakably wants to discuss the nature of war and violence and their effects upon children, she doesn’t tether the discussion to any moral center or transcendent source of authority.  Why is it wrong to oppress other people?  Why is wrong to live a life of luxury that is built upon the backs of others?  The renowned German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche would argue that it isn’t wrong to live in this fashion.  In fact, Nietzsche would suggest that the most moral choice one could make is to have the strength of will to take that which one desires from this world.  But Collins doesn’t want to follow in Nietzsche’s footsteps.  Instead, contrary to the foundational plotline of the story, she wants to posit a fuzzy, moral goodness that lies at the heart of all people.  Yes, life is to be valued, but not because it is endowed with the image of its Creator.  Instead, life is to be valued simply because people are good and have the “right” to live.  In this sense, Collins is a direct descendent of Enlightenment thinking, and in the midst of a very dark and violent novel, she is still trying to cry out: “But we’re making progress!”

Concluding Thoughts:     

In the end, people will want to know, “Is this novel worth reading?”  Is it appropriate for young adults?  As a Christian who is deeply committed to understanding and engaging the culture around us, as a Christian who believes that we need to train our children to ask probing questions of the culture, I would argue that The Hunger Games is an enjoyable read that can serve as an excellent resource for discussions centered on the grounding of morality, political resistance (both violent and non-violent), strength in women,  and the nature of humanity.  Highly recommended for ages 14 and up.

 

“The Hunger Games” Trilogy … (part 1)

SPOILER ALERT:  I’ve been told I need to add a spoiler alert to this post.  I’ve never really understood this practice, as I’ve always assumed that if I am reading something, I am going to learn something about the subject at hand.  Nevertheless, if you thought you were going to read this post and learn nothing about The Hunger Games, you have now been warned that this is not likely to be the case.  Tread carefully.

Every work of art has a worldview.  That is to say, every work of art – regardless of when it was composed, by whom it was composed, or even for what purpose it was composed – has a perspective, a way of seeing the “reality” that defines our everyday life.  So when we look at a work of art, rather than passively taking it in, or judging it solely upon its ability to entertain us, one of the best things we can do is to try to analyze the perspective or worldview that underlies the work itself.  For in understanding the worldview, we will gain a much greater appreciation for the work of art, and we will come to know whether it is great art on the basis of whether or not it succeeded in presenting the “reality” it sought to explain.

With that in mind, I want to start a new series that explores the worldview of the run-away best sellers known as The Hunger Games trilogy.[1]  For the sake of those of you who have not yet read the books, but would like to know a little more about the phenomenon, I now offer this brief, spoiler-filled summary of the first book in the trilogy.

In the ruins of a place once known as North America lies the nation of Panem, a shining Capitol surrounded by twelve outlying districts. Long ago the districts waged war on the Capitol and were defeated. As part of the surrender terms, each district agreed to send one boy and one girl to appear in an annual televised event called, “The Hunger Games,” a fight to the death on live TV. Sixteen-year-old Katniss Everdeen, who lives alone with her mother and younger sister, regards it as a death sentence when she is forced to represent her district in the Games. The terrain, rules, and level of audience participation may change but one thing is constant: kill or be killed.[2]

Now, with that basic understanding of the plot, it’s time to pose some questions.[3]  First, I want to ask the question: what is prime reality in The Hunger Games?  In other words, if everything else were to be stripped away, what is of utmost importance to Katniss, Gale, Peeta and the others?  Surprisingly enough, in a novel built upon such a violent and degrading premise, the answer must unquestionably be: life.  And this is where many of the reviews I read have clearly missed the mark.  Consider, for a moment, the premise of the games themselves.  The hunger games are held as a means of reminding the population at large that the Capital has the capability to take their children and force them to fight to the death.  This is never shown as any other than an abomination.  Even when the citizens of the Capital are shown to be throwing elaborate parties and to be gambling on the outcome of the games, the reader is in on the joke.  This is high satire meant to mock a society that is so shallow that its primary form of entertainment is derived from the deaths of children being slaughtered by other children.

Moreover, lest you think that all of the children descend into the madness, notice how only three children are killed by the heroes, Katniss and Peeta.    The first victim, killed by Katniss, has sprung a trap and ensnared a young, innocent girl by the name of Rue.  When Katniss runs into the scene, desperate to save Rue, she is surprised by another boy who spears Rue while still in the trap.  Without thinking, Katniss fires an arrow through the boy’s throat and he dies quickly.  So the heroine kills the first victim almost instinctively as she tries to save her young friend.  The second victim to go down is accidentally killed by Peeta.  He has been out gathering fruit to eat.  Unfortunately, he is unwise to the ways of the woods, and he inadvertently picks poisonous berries.  When another “tribute,” or player, happens upon their camp, she steals the fruit and ends up poisoning herself.   Finally, near the climax of the story, wild animals overcome the main antagonist in the arena.  As he is slowly dying, Katniss notches an arrow and lets it fly into his skull as an act of mercy.  So in all three cases where the heroes kill, the circumstances that surround the killing are such that the actions of the heroes are highly defensible from a moral perspective.

So what is the author saying?  Life matters.  And to take the life of another is morally reprehensible act, particularly when that act is performed merely for the sake of sport or entertainment.

This brings us to our second major question.  If life is the prime reality in the world of the Hunger Games, what is the nature of the world itself?  Perhaps a better way to ask that question would be to say: what is the world like?  What stories give it meaning?  What problems exist that threaten the prime reality?  What can be hoped for and what can possibly be achieved?

Interestingly enough, the major problem in the world of The Hunger Games is not the games themselves.  The games are merely a tool utilized by the real source of the problem, which is the government.  You see, at its core, The Hunger Games is actually a novel about the seeds of political unrest and social dissent.  One group possesses all of the power, while the populations in the outlying 12 districts have no power.   What’s more, the people in the outlying districts are forced to scratch out a meager existence while providing for the opulent life-styles of the rich.  So in many ways, The Hunger Games actually serves as a populist critique of society.  But which society?  Remember, The Hunger Games is set in the near future, in a land called Panem; and Panem is built on the ruins of the North American continent.  So clearly, the author sees our society as being one that is in grave danger, and it is out of the ashes of our ruin, she fears, that new tyrannies will spring up to enslave humanity.  In that sense, it is not too far fetched to suggest that The Hunger Games has much in common with the Occupy Wall Street movement and a belief that the ninety-nine percent are being made to serve the one percent.

This review will be continued at:

The Hunger Games Trilogy … (part 2)

The Hunger Games Trilogy … (part 3)

---

[1] The Hunger Games trilogy includes: The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, and Mockingjay.

[2] This summary was taken directly from the book summary offered by amazon.com.

[3] To assist me in analyzing this book, I am going to pull upon a set of questions first developed by Dr. James Sire, a too-often, under-appreciated, Christian apologist and teacher.

 

The Very Best In Violent Young Adult Literature …

On the heels of yesterday’s post (“Anything to Get Them to Read …”), I decided to delve a little deeper in the world of Young Adult Fiction.  Quite honestly, I have been fascinated to read the various responses that many of you submitted to that initial post; and I find myself wondering what the state of young adult fiction tells us about what we believe to be true in terms of the future and what kind of world we are preparing our kids to inhabit.

So let’s start by taking a look at another list: “The 2010 Best Books for Young Adults” as compiled by the Young Adult Library Services Association.[1] This is an alphabetical list of ninety books, the first ten of which I will offer as a sampling below:

Wintergirls by Laurie Halse Anderson.  Lia is haunted by her best friend’s death from bulimia, as she struggles with her own eating disorder.

Tales of the Madman Underground by John Barnes.  In an attempt to distance himself from the rest of the students in the school’s therapy group known as the Madman Underground, Karl launches his senior year with “Operation Be Fucking Normal.”

The Unnameables by Ellen Booraem.  In a place where everything has a name and every name has a meaning, outsider Medford Runyuin struggles in vain to follow the rules of his adopted home.

The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie by Alan Bradley.  Flavia de Luce is delighted with the discovery of a dead snipe on her doorstep and considers it a bonus when a human body is found in her cucumber patch.

Going Bovine by Libba Bray.  Cameron knew there was something wrong when he started seeing pillars of fire and angels, but he never imagined he had mad cow disease.

Demon’s Lexicon by Sarah Rees Brennan.  Sixteen-year-old Nick and his older brother Alan are always on the run. Now, Alan has been marked by a demon and to save him, the boys must become the hunters.

Hate List by Jennifer Brown.  In the year following the devastating shootings at her high school orchestrated by her boyfriend Nick, Valerie must come to terms with grief and guilt in order to move on with her life.

All the Broken Pieces by Anne E. Burg.  12-year-old Matt struggles to cope with his memories of family left behind in war-torn Vietnam with the help of his adoptive parents, his music teacher, and his baseball coach.

Fire by Kristin Cashore.  In a world full of monsters so beautiful they lure people into their doom, how can people protect themselves from human monsters?

Because I am Furniture by Thalia Chaitas.  Anke watches her siblings and mother suffer at the hands of her abusive father until she finds enough strength, through involvement in volleyball, to demonstrate her needs.

What do you think?  As I skimmed that list, this is what I saw:  death by bulimia, harsh adoptive homes, “bonus human bodies,” mad cow disease, hunting demons, boyfriends that become high school shooters, “war torn Vietnam,” human predators (presumably pedophiles and the like), abusive fathers and a desire to be “fucking normal.”

Now when it comes to art and culture, people seem to gravitate towards one of two extremes.  The first group wants to suggest that art is merely entertainment and it doesn’t connect in any significant way to the greater culture at large.  So for instance, people in this group feel no internal constraints against playing violent video games because they are just games, not reality.  These are the people that suggest that “Glee” is just a television show, in spite of the writers’ open admissions to the contrary.  In other words, the people in this group erect a very strong wall between art and entertainment and the world around them.  They believe that life can be compartmentalized to such a degree that what we read, see, play and hear has little to no impact upon how we think and view the world.

The second group, by contrast, suggests that all art is a reflection of the greater culture, and therefore all art bears witness to the culture’s values and beliefs. With no hesitation whatsoever, I place myself firmly in this latter group, for I believe that all art is the product of individuals and that all individuals are the products of the times in which they live.  Therefore, to my way of thinking, all art, as it is produced by human beings, must be culturally bound in some way or another.

So the questions I am pondering after reviewing the list above are these: what does our society believe regarding violence?  Why is violence such a prevalent theme in the fiction we produce for our children?  Is the reality of history finally overcoming the “myth of progress” that was propagated by the Enlightenment thinkers?  If so, what will this myth be replaced by in the broader culture? And lastly, why do feel the need to warn our children of the impending chaos?

---

[1] All summaries are taken directly from the Young Adult Library Services Association website.

 

Anything to Get Them to Read …

Last night, I picked up The Hunger Games because several of my students have read it; and I was curious to know more about this book that is rapidly becoming a cultural touchstone.  Somewhere about half way through it, a thought crossed my mind, and I decided to share it with you this morning.  Take a look at this list of the best selling books from 2010.

Best Selling Books of 2010

While there are a number of different ways to look at this list, the thing that struck me last night is that I was reading a book intended for young adults.  And when that hit me, it got me to thinking about the state of publishing since the advent of the Harry Potter phenomenon that began in 1997.  If you look back on the New York Times Best Seller lists dating to that era, the only book oriented towards youth that made the list were the various books in the Potter series.

But now, in the year for which we have the most recent data, over 61% of the top 31 best selling books are written for, published and marketed to adolescents and young adults between the ages of 12 to 21.  These books include: all three entries in The Hunger Games trilogy, all five books in the Twilight series, six books in the mythologically-based Percy Jackson series, five books in the Diary of a Wimpy Kid series and one stand alone novel.

The Pulitzer Prize-winning author, Maya Angelou, once said: “Any book that helps a child to form a habit of reading, to make reading one of his deep and continuing needs, is good for him.”

Last night, as I was working my way through The Hunger Games, I couldn’t help but think of Ms. Angelou’s statement; and I found myself wondering: what do you think?  Do you think that any book that drives a child to read is a good thing?

 

Leaving the Faith? Or Sticking Around?

For many years now, evangelicals have been greatly concerned by the connection between young adults going away to a four-year state college and students abandoning the faith.  And there is good reason to be concerned.  For regardless of which study one finds most reliable, the rates of apostasy are truly alarming.  Check out the following research.  In each case, the study in question tracks the percentage of students that leave the faith by the time they graduate.

 

• 88%     The Southern Baptist Convention’s Family Life Council study.  (2000.  Unfortunately, I cannot find the actual study, only references to it.)

• 70%     LifeWay Research study  (2007.  LifeWay also found that only 35% eventually return to the church.)

• 66%     Assembly of God study  (Again, I cannot find the actual study, only references to it.)

• 61%     Barna Study: “Most Twenty-somethings put Christianity on the Shelf  (2006)

Four years ago, in 2007, Steve Garber, author of The Fabric of Faithfulness: Weaving Together Belief and Behavior updated the award-winning, 1998 edition of his book.  In the updated edition, he compared two groups of people: (1) Self-professed Christians that entered the university and left the faith after four years of college and, (2) self-professed Christians that entered the university and remained active in the faith upon graduation.  His findings were fascinating.  With few exceptions, those that continued on in their faith had three commonalities:

1. They established a relationship with a mentor who actively lived out his/her Christian faith.
2. They established a peer-group that met regularly and actively lived out their Christian faith.
3. They possessed a Christian worldview that was sufficiently developed to recognize the fallacies of the worldviews that are often taught, both implicitly and explicitly, at the university level.

To my way of thinking, this raises at least three significant issues for Christians that are committed to youth.

First, what are we doing to establish robust, culturally conditioned ministries on college campuses around the world?  Is this a priority of the church, or an after-thought that only becomes significant when it is our child that leaves the faith? 

Secondly, what are we doing to develop the Christian worldviews of the teenagers that still live in our homes and attend our churches?  Are we assuming that Sunday school lessons, family devotions and prayer times are sufficient, or are we actively training our students to deconstruct the assumptions that lay behind other worldviews.  Moreover, are we actively teaching our students how others will attempt to deconstruct the worldview of the Christian? 

Finally, what role does the social community play in the formation of the Christian character?  And what are the implications of this as we consider how we do ministry both to the youth in our church and to the youth outside of it? 

 

 

Movies to See in 2011

On the heels of a less than stellar movie-going season in 2010, it appears as if Hollywood is gearing up to give us another mediocre batch of flicks.  From Transformers: Dark Side of the Moon to Bridesmaids, theaters have been filled with a glut of vacuous, idea-free diversions that are completely devoid of both substance and style.

Having said that, there have been some interesting smaller films released in the last few months and there appear to be a few more on the way.  So as a occasional screenwriter and as a lover of film, I offer these to you in the hopes that you might give them a chance.

The Adjustment Bureau  (Available on DVD / Blue Ray).  A highly stylized and very enjoyable look at the “free” choices we make and the powers that lie behind them.  It was nothing like what I expected; and far better than I would have imagined.

The Ides of March  (Currently in wide release).   Set during the frenetic last days of a heavily-contested presidential primary race, this is an intimate look at one man’s choice to become part of the machine or to reject it.  Quite possibly, the finest political thriller I have seen in recent memory.

Source Code  (Available on DVD / Blue Ray).   This is the second major film by Duncan Jones, and an excellent entry point into the work of a promising young director.  Entertaining, tense, and surprisingly filled with questions surrounding issues related to the quality of life and the right to die.

The Tree of Life  (Available of DVD / Blue Ray).  Without a doubt, this will be the most ambitious, poetic film on this list, due to one reason and one reason only:  Terrence Malick.  In two-and-a-half hours, Malick explores all of the major God-questions through a coming-of-age story interspersed with extensive, meditative shots of nature.  In all honesty, this will be a film unlike anything you have likely seen before.

The Descendants  (Nov. 16).  Already being touted as a front-runner for the Best Actor Oscar, George Clooney stars as a man whose life begins to fall apart after learning that his wife, who is in coma, is in the middle of an affair.  Of course, the true start may be Alexander Payne, director of such notable works as Sideways, About Schmidt, and Election.

Hugo  (Nov. 23).   Based upon the acclaimed chidlren’s novel, The Invention of Hugo Cabret, this is the latest film from the legendary Martin Scorsese.  Added bonus: several inspired casting choices including Chloe Grace Moretz, breakout star of Kickass and Let Me In.

The Muppets  (Nov. 23).  If you don’t understand why this is on the list … well, what more can I say?  I pity you.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy  (Dec. 9).  My wife and I have a mutual love of well-crafted spy movies.  This film, starring the incomparable Gary Oldman, is based upon the classic Cold War novel by the master story-teller, John le Carre.  While I suspect Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol will clear more money on opening weekend, true lovers of spy fiction will know where the wise money is to be spent.

We Need to Talk About Kevin  (Dec. 9).  Based upon a novel by the same name, this psychological thriller explores the divide between nature and nurture, as a mother (Tilda Swinton) struggles to come to grips with her son’s evil inclinations.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo  (Dec. 21).  David Fincher, the director of Se7en, The Game, Fight Club, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and The Social Network gets to play with the source material by Steig Larrson.  And if that doesn’t excite you as a film afficianado, I don’t know what will.  (Warning: This film wrestles with the notion that our society dismisses and then legitimizes violence against women.  Some content may be highly offensive and/or disturbing.)

Finally, I give you three more films that show some promise, but for one reason or another, haven’t fully caught my attention just yet.

Rampart  (Nov. 23).   The main draw here is Woody Harrelson, an underrated actor, in the role of a Vietnam veteran-turned-L.A. cop.  As for the main concern: it’s Woody Harrelson, a man not always known for judicious choices.

The Adventures of Tintin  (Dec. 21).  The pedigree is impeccable.  Based upon a popular comic book series, the film is produced by Peter Jackson of Lord of the Rings fame and directed by Steven Speilberg, the acknowledged master of the modern day blockbuster.  Still, I’m not there yet.

We Bought a Zoo  (Dec. 23).  This film intrigues me for one reason and one reason only: Cameron Crowe.  Back in the day, he wrote and directed such films as: Say Anything, Singles, Jerry Maguire, and Almost Famous.  But more recently, he’s given us the far more lackluster: Vanilla Sky and Elizabethtown.  Will this be a return to form?