|
Response to WCU panel discussion on The Passion of the Christ
To the Editor:
Having witnessed the media cacophony upon the release of Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, I anticipated attending Western Carolina University's March 23 panel discussion on the film a couple of weeks ago with some eagerness. I was looking forward, after the media frenzy, to a scholarly response.
The panel consisted of three WCU faculty members and the main speaker - an "expert" from out of town. Their bias was soon apparent. Being of like mind, they offered no real alternative view. I paraphrase: The film is anti-Semitic (how often have we heard that one?), the violence is gratuitous (never mind that it really happened). One felt that as essentially one evaluation of the film was given, all subsequent, dissenting conclusions drawn by the attendees were suspect.
Arguments were based on flimsy premises. For example, the film, the panel members solemnly warned us, is dangerous, because pastors tell their congregations that this is a "must-see" film. The "reasoning" follows: the adult congregation, compelled to see the movie, drag their kids along, who will be traumatized by the film. To substantiate such an assertion, another assertion was made: that pediatricians and child psychologists say that this is the case with Gibson's movie, though no definitive studies were cited.
The "logic" continues: the kids will be traumatized, we're told, by the film because of the violence, which is unrelenting and convincing. Later, from the same speaker, we learn that the film is an ineffectual evangelical tool because the violence is unrelenting and not convincing - it dehumanizes the Christ character.
Contradictory remarks and concepts abound. One objection to the film is that it decontextualizes Christ. The movie problematically presents to us only the passion of Christ. Later, from the same panel member, we are told that at the core of Christian doctrine is murder. Actually, the core of Christian doctrine is that the Son of God willingly gave His life - yes, via murder - and rose again from the dead, redeeming mankind from eternal separation from God. Condensing that doctrine to murder is misrepresentation by decontextualization.
Continuing in that line of reasoning, the panel member stated that our culture has many murders occurring daily, so much so that the year 2004 did not need this film - just another instance of murder, a depiction of a doctrine with murder at its core. Such a perspective again decontextualizes the portrayal of the crucifixion by equating it with any other murder taking place daily.
The question-and-answer segment revealed that not only were the panel members of like mind, but that they preferred the attendees to be as well. The most notable comment for the panel came from a nervous young woman, who politely thanked the panel for their presentation. There is, however, she offered, another point of view. It is the Christian one. She briefly related why she thought Gibson made The Passion, and how his film relates to Christian teaching. She summed up by quoting Scripture (fair enough since the panel had referred to the Bible throughout the entire discussion). And God will confound the wisdom of the wise.
The above is just a sample of the show of critical thought the panel displayed. Additionally, the panel fostered a tone and tenor in the hall that was anything but collegiate. The panel, notably the "expert" from out of town, made snide remarks aimed at particular groups of people, which were met with smirks and laughter from some young attendees.
There were several people in the hall who were not amused, including myself. One, I'm sure, was that lucky young woman. Hers was the only comment for which the panel had no response.
I invite all reasoned criticism from WCU faculty, students, and others, but not from the panel members. I would like, rather, a scholarly response.
Vicki Provost
Sylva
'Pro-sense rally'
To the Editor:
Gas prices are rising, and Kansas is as far away as ever, which leaves me wondering why a whole churchful of people are going to drive all the way to Cullowhee.
Cullowhee is a pretty nice little place, but these people aren't coming to see the sights or fish the river, but to protest a student-produced play.
I could not imagine the citizens of Cullowhee driving to Topeka, Kan., to protest a play because the people of Cullowhee not only have enough sense but have more important things to worry about.
I think that we residents of Jackson County should pay our own libations to OPEC and make the trip to Western Carolina University to have our own protest.
Not a "pro-gay" protest but a "pro-sense" rally.
Will Cowan
Whittier |
