Religion and Film Part II: Theology and Pedagogy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Centre for the Study of Communication and Culture Volume 24 (2005) No. 1 IN THIS ISSUE Religion and Film Part II: Theology and Pedagogy Terry Lindvall Visiting Lecturer, Duke Divinity School AQUARTERLY REVIEW OF COMMUNICATION RESEARCH ISSN: 0144-4646 Communication Research Trends Table of Contents Volume 24 (2005) Number 1 http://cscc.scu.edu [The first part of this essay, addressing Film and Published four times a year by the Centre for the Study of Religion: History and Criticism, appeared in Communication and Culture (CSCC), sponsored by the Communication Research Trends, Volume 23, California Province of the Society of Jesus. Number 4, December 2004.] Copyright 2005. ISSN 0144-4646 Editor: William E. Biernatzki, S.J. 4. Theology and Film . 3 Managing Editor: Paul A. Soukup, S.J. A. Overviews . 5 Editorial assistant: Yocupitzia Oseguera B. Narrative Theology . 6 C. Mythic Religion . 7 Subscription: D. The Fantastic . 9 Annual subscription (Vol. 24) US$45 E. Transcendence in Film . 10 F. Downward Transcendence and the Demonic . 12 Payment by check, MasterCard, Visa or US$ preferred. For payments by MasterCard or Visa, send full account 5. Film Pedagogy and Application . 15 number, expiration date, name on account, and signature. A. Educational Uses of Religion and Film . 15 B. Catechism Uses of Religion and Film . 16 Checks and/or International Money Orders (drawn on C. Homiletic Uses of Film . 17 USA banks; for non-USA banks, add $10 for handling) D. Devotional Uses of Film . 18 should be made payable to Communication Research Trends and sent to the managing editor 6. Conclusion . 20 Paul A. Soukup, S.J. Communication Department References . 22 Santa Clara University 500 El Camino Real Selective Religious Filmography . 37 Santa Clara, CA 95053 USA Book Reviews . 40 Transfer by wire to: Bank of America, 485 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, California. 95050, Account 00425- 14510, Routing #121000358. Add $10 for handling. Address all correspondence to the managing editor at the address shown above. Tel: +1-408-554-5498 Fax: +1-408-554-4913 email: [email protected] The Centre for the Study of Communication and Culture (CSCC) is an international service of the Society of Jesus established in 1977 and currently managed by the California Province of the Society of Jesus, P.O. Box 519, Los Gatos, CA 95031-0519. 2— VOLUME 24 (2005) NO. 1 COMMUNICATION RESEARCH TRENDS Religion and Film Terry Lindvall [email protected] Communication Research Trends published Part I (History and Criticism) of Professor Lindvall’s review of studies on Religion and Film as Volume 23, No. 4 (December 2004). This issue publishes the rest of his review. For the convenience of the readers of Communication Research Trends, the combined reference lists for Part I and Part II follow the text in this issue, together with a filmography assembled by Professor Lindvall. In order to assist the reader, we reprint here part of the Introduction to the overall review essay. —Ed. This review, however, is intended to survey the History and Religion—such studies accommodate the English language literature on film and religion and to dominant issue of film censorship. corral various research trends into suitable academic A second, larger and broader, category of Film categories. (For a remarkable review of relevant litera- Criticism encompasses various religious approaches to ture in other languages, see May, 1997a, and understanding (and then rejecting, engaging, or appro- Hasenberg, 1992.) Rather than looking at the critical priating) film as significant modes of human commu- posture or interpretative mode of the writings, I will be nication. Subsumed under this rubric are representa- examining the works according to a set of scholarly and tional studies (from Jesus films and Christ figures to pedagogical research motives. In the larger framework, various portrayals of religious character and rituals) I am less concerned with theological positions or criti- and more recent trends in inter-textual, cultural studies cal attitudes toward film, than I am with what methods approaches to religion and film and to audience analy- of research or postures of intent have been appropriated sis, ethnographic, and reception studies. and practiced by various scholars engaged in the com- A third section examines the more conceptual mingled disciplines of religion and film studies, and strand of Theology and Film Theory. Finally, I have which ones are emerging as the most heuristic (or mere- added a review of presentations of Pedagogical and ly fashionable) at this time. However, my debt is great Pragmatic Applications of film and religion. As a caveat, as I borrow heavily from the aforementioned authors in or more aptly a confession, I admit that these categories organizing appropriate categories. are quite elastic, slippery, and overlapping. Arguments, Like the sorting hat of Hogswart, my own taxon- and good ones at that, could be made for situating a text omy places works in what I deem suitable categories of in alternative groupings. Some of my favorite texts scholarly approaches. One of the earliest established received less than deserved coverage, but the avalanche publications, Reverend Herbert Jump’s 1911 pamphlet, of materials was simply too overwhelming to give fair The Religious Possibilities of the Motion Picture, pro- and full treatment to all these deserving and notable vides a sort of prologue for historical based studies of works. And to those whose works I have overlooked and religion and film, under the research heading of Film completely missed, I offer a word of apology, “oops.” 4. Theology and Film French film theorist Andre Bazin focuses much of 1990) who brings the cognitive-affective theory of film his attention on the ontology of the cinematographic spectatorship into the forefront of an inquisition on the image (1971, 1996). This Roman Catholic critic com- nature of film. How do a spectator’s rational mental activ- pares film to the art of embalming the dead, to the ities underlie his or her affective responses to film? Even Egyptian religious practice of trying to preserve life by as philosophers like Litch (2002) deem it worthy to reflect representing it. Philosophical explanations of an episte- on film, religious scholars and theologians move beyond mology of film develop from the Reformed tradition of viewing film as “harmless entertainment” to analyzing scholars like Plantinga (Plantinga & Smith, 1999; Carroll, films as visual discourse with theological significance COMMUNICATION RESEARCH TRENDS VOLUME 24 (2005) NO. 1 — 3 (Maltby, 1983). The emotional relationships of spectators ly explored in Brown (2000). Likewise, Nichols (1980) and films are based on basic cognitive competencies, that provides an incomparable foundation in art and film. one understands the images even in one’s responses to Worthwhile readings on the theological nature of them. For example, films like The Night of the Living communication media exist in Soukup (1996), particu- Dead elicit fear and disgust; comedies evoke laughter; larly in reprinted essays by Ong (1996) and Goethals tear-jerking melodramas, tears; thrillers, anxiety. How (1996). Similar to Warren (1997), the essays situate the films manipulate such responses and how spectators iden- nature and functions of film within a larger context of tify with film characters (as in Groundhog Day) is the mediated communication and the Church. Inquiries interest of the cognitivists as much as of the psychoana- range from how film orchestrates the construction of lytic critics. The empathy induced by close-ups (in the self, how the hegemony of corporate media dictates Bergman’s works or in Blade Runner) raises issues of the representations, how the church adopted iconic and ontology of the film image itself, leading as well to ques- aniconic aesthetics, to how media have altered theolo- tions of epistemology, of how we recognize, know, read, gy, moral formation, ecclesiology, and homiletics. and interpret such images. Advocates of the Catholic imagination (discussed in Philosophy does not reside far from its sister the- Part I) delve into the realm of religious aesthetics. For ology. Mortimer Adler (1937) builds a religious per- John May, such an approach allows true autonomous spective of film upon a Greek philosophical foundation interpretation and has become the most challenging area of cinematic aesthetics. Plato’s Allegory of the Cave of inquiry in the 1990s. Scholarly studies are called to opens up an analogy for looking at illusionary (and move beyond morality, cataloguing explicit religious poetic) images in the dark that suggests general princi- themes and elements and identifying humanistic themes, ples for looking at films. Herein, Adler offers an image into the religious significance of film itself. Primary in this of the artist as a seducer, an inspired but potentially approach is Martin (1981); this study looks at the image corrupting agent who is dialectically challenged by the itself and its orientation (see also Martin, 1974). The idea politician, ergo censor. From Plato and Aristotle that the image has profound impact upon one’s religious (wherein Adler finds a prototype of entertainment edu- sense of reality and related concepts (i.e., film as imagi- cation where art objects are educative and able to either native construct, story, and religious consciousness) corrupt or cultivate moral virtues), Adler establishes a should be examined. While the unique assortment of cam- transition to the revealed wisdom of Christianity on the era images available (e.g., panoramas, slow motion, time- nature and place of the art of the movies. As the poet lapsed, etc.) enables us to see more and more deeply with was a rival to the philosopher in Greek thought, now a radical sense of consciousness, what is needed is to the filmmaker becomes the rival to the priest. recover a holistic, integrated understanding of the stream A great divergence of Christian thought that of images and how an experience of these images in nar- shapes responses to film is in the doctrine of original rative form leads to worldviews.