Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
MattP

Blue Like Jazz (2012)

192 posts in this topic

I remain convinced that the only way to do that is through some sustained wrestling with theological questions, and BLJ really comes up short there.

This, and the fact that you are a judgmental Christian, like a lot of other bigots out there, are the real reason you will not understand Miller. Or anything that is happening that is real, which in my opinion means post-evangelical.

There are groups of people (like quite a few I am involved with) that believe that "sustained wrestling with theological questions," is a total freaking waste of time. Take a trip to Africa and you'll see that the days of "wrestling" are done.

Especially if you are trying to come up with the one right answer so that you can be the one right person or people-group or denomination who can then cast aspersions toward any group deemed "not right." (these days its typically democrats and homosexuals)

Christian faith isn't about assuming you know about anyone's motivation other than your own.

I hesitate to post this because I hate picking fights, especially stupid little internet fights, but sometimes a rebuke can be a good thing as well. Love wins.

Edited by stef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I remain convinced that the only way to do that is through some sustained wrestling with theological questions, and BLJ really comes up short there.

This, and the fact that you are a judgmental Christian, like a lot of other bigots out there, are the real reason you will not understand Miller. Or anything that is happening that is real, which in my opinion means post-evangelical.

There are groups of people (like quite a few I am involved with) that believe that "sustained wrestling with theological questions," is a total freaking waste of time. Take a trip to Africa and you'll see that the days of "wrestling" are done.

Especially if you are trying to come up with the one right answer so that you can be the one right person or people-group or denomination who can then cast aspersion toward any group deemed "not right." (these days its typically democrats and homosexuals)

Christian faith isn't about assuming you know about anyone's motivation other than your own.

I hesitate to post this because I hate picking fights, especially stupid little internet fights, but sometimes a rebuke can be a good thing as well. Love wins.

Well, I don't mind a fair rebuke. But I'd like to know what evidence of "bigotry" you are seeing.

The kind of sustained wrestling with theological questions that I'm advocating (and that I find Miller lacking) doesn't mean disengaged academic navel-gazing and quibbling over minor doctrines and narrow sectarian concerns, but critical reflection rooted in praxis.

An interest in the plight of the poor is always commendable, and to the extent that Miller nurtures an impulse to serve others and work for social justice, I think that's great. But humanitarian crises like those in africa should inspire deep theological reflection. And pragmatically, our response to these sorts of crises are most effective and most sustainable if firmly grounded in sound theology. Miller doesn't really offer his readers any resources to that end.

Despite my occasional curmudgeonly tendencies, I certainly don't think I have the one right answer, and as a gay man who usually votes democratic, I'm definitely not interested in casting aspersions on democrats and homosexuals, or anyone really. What I am interested in is critical thinking that helps us improve the answers we can offer.

Edited by Holy Moly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy Moly, I apologize -- I was getting you mixed up with Invisible Man, who has more of the tendencies that I described than you do. (But you certainly appear to have some of them in this thread, cuz you actually managed to sound like him.)

And I didn't say the remarks made you sound like a bigot, but only that it made you look like so many other bigots that are out there.

In fact, in light of all you've revealed here, you're probably the last to be called a bigot 'round these parts. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holy Moly, I apologize -- I was getting you mixed up with Invisible Man, who has more of the tendencies that I described than you do. (But you certainly appear to have some of them in this thread, cuz you actually managed to sound like him.)

Whoa, really?

(Speaking of...TIM hasn't really written in a thread in a while.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What, you want me to apologize to you too? Fine, sorry already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What, you want me to apologize to you too? Fine, sorry already.

Er, no. I just thought confusing them was impossible, considering their posting styles/temperaments. No need to get defensive. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What, you want me to apologize to you too? Fine, sorry already.

Er, no. I just thought confusing them was impossible, considering their posting styles/temperaments. No need to get defensive. :)

Me? DEFENSIVE???

Naaaaaaaa.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are groups of people (like quite a few I am involved with) that believe that "sustained wrestling with theological questions," is a total freaking waste of time. Take a trip to Africa and you'll see that the days of "wrestling" are done.

The Anglican church would disagree, which has done the most constructive theological wrestling in decades among the conservative collectives in Africa.

FWIW, I can see BLJ working well in a film format, as Miller's writing is simple, pared down, and a bit cinematic in the narrative parts. I like these sorts of books for what they are, devotional literature in the guise of autobiography. I glean a lot from them. If I want some theological heavy lifting, there are plenty of resources elsewhere.

I am seeing more and more of these quasi-documentary Christian films though, and I hope it doesn't become standard. Aren't there more creative ways to film information?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So..a movie...hmm.

I suppose I should finish the book then. When I sat down to read this it reminded me of Robert McCammon's, Boy's Life, so much that it lost its intrigue. I still think I will try again.

Movie: It would be nice to see some of the stuff Steve Taylor has been "directing".

There were a couple of things that interested me a bit more in this thread than the topic of the thread. I will probably be chastised but its worth it.

"post-evangelical" - Stef, do you really think there is such a thing? It is almost like saying post-Protestantism.

I am seeing more and more of these quasi-documentary Christian films though, and I hope it doesn't become standard. Aren't there more creative ways to film information?

It wouldn't surprise me if it is on its way to becoming a standard, just like power point and moving text during worship services.

The conversation I would be most interested in is the are "there more creative ways to film information?" Where is that taking place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thom(asher) wrote:

: Stef, do you really think there is such a thing? It is almost like saying post-Protestantism.

Well, there have been whole books on self-styled "post-evangelicalism" for at least a decade, now, so yeah, there does seem to be such a thing.

Evangelicalism (which goes back to the 1700s) is a sub-set of Protestantism (which goes back to the 1500s), which, in turn, I guess is kind of like a form of post-Catholicism. And these days you can be post-anything -- probably even post-post-modern -- so, yeah, there's nothing all that unusual about the term "post-evangelical".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thom(asher) wrote:

: Stef, do you really think there is such a thing? It is almost like saying post-Protestantism.

Well, there have been whole books on self-styled "post-evangelicalism" for at least a decade, now, so yeah, there does seem to be such a thing.

Evangelicalism (which goes back to the 1700s) is a sub-set of Protestantism (which goes back to the 1500s), which, in turn, I guess is kind of like a form of post-Catholicism. And these days you can be post-anything -- probably even post-post-modern -- so, yeah, there's nothing all that unusual about the term "post-evangelical".

Thanks, Peter. I don't find the term unusual in the least, mostly just ribbing Stef. I certainly do not disagree with you or the historical time-line of such church movements; however, I think a reasonably sound argument could be made for the origins of evangelical(ism) to be found in the early church, pre-ascension.

It may even be that in a high church/low church, fundementalist Evangelical sort of way we are "post-evangelical." I just, as of yet, do not see any movement/group who stakes their identity in "post-evangelicalism" in such a way that has really departed from the evangelical thoughts and tenets typically associated with them. Therefore, I question the term and label.

You know, many, many books were written for many decades before the idea of post-modern (or ism) took root. I think you are right when you say one can be post-anything these days. I would also venture to imagine that being post-post-modern might even be truly post-modern.

I would also need some major convincing that we could consider a current state of post-Catholicism.

This is taking the thread of track and may have a better place in a thread post-ArtsAndFaith :)

Always good to chat with you Peter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thom(asher) wrote:

: I certainly do not disagree with you or the historical time-line of such church movements; however, I think a reasonably sound argument could be made for the origins of evangelical(ism) to be found in the early church, pre-ascension.

Well, as one who has moved around a bit between denominations, I can't think of a single church that DOESN'T trace its origins to the early church, pre-ascension. :)

The question is what SORT of continuity each of these traditions claims, and in that regard, the distinctive characteristics of Evangelicalism in particular, and Protestantism in general, can be traced to specific times and places long, long after the early church. Unless, I suppose, one wants to claim that Evangelicals and Protestants were writing and thinking and pastoring churches in some sense during the intervening millennium-and-a-half.

No doubt my Anabaptist roots are showing here. :)

: I just, as of yet, do not see any movement/group who stakes their identity in "post-evangelicalism" in such a way that has really departed from the evangelical thoughts and tenets typically associated with them. Therefore, I question the term and label.

If memory serves, Dave Tomlinson, author of The Post-Evangelical, makes the distinction between "post-" and "ex-". Just as post-modernity is not all that different from modernity in several important respects, so too post-evangelicalism maintains a continuity with evangelicalism without rejecting it outright.

: This is taking the thread of track and may have a better place in a thread post-ArtsAndFaith :)

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, as one who has moved around a bit between denominations, I can't think of a single church that DOESN'T trace its origins to the early church, pre-ascension. :)

Now that I think of it, I believe I must currently classify myself as Post-Peter!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve Taylor just posted this on the Blue Like Jazz movie blog: http://www.bluelikejazzthemovie.com/2009/07/15/on-language/

On Language

(July 15, 2009)by steve

Those who know me will testify that I rarely, if ever, use profanity in my day-to-day speech. (Okay, when I ran the record label there was that one staff meeting when I called that guy an *******, but at the time he really was acting like an ******* and I was merely articulating a consensus view for the purposes of team-building.)

If

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has a strange symmetry with the thread about Derek Webb in the music forum...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was classic Taylor humor. Loved it.

I wonder if the 10 cents from every dollar toward the Clone newsletter still goes toward his wife and kids and new Honda. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Taylor gotten a completed film out so far? It seems like his projects all have stalled along the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Taylor gotten a completed film out so far? It seems like his projects all have stalled along the way.

Didn't he direct a movie starring Michael W. Smith a few years ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

morgan1098 wrote:

: Didn't he direct a movie starring Michael W. Smith a few years ago?

Yep. Link to our thread on The Second Chance (2006). (Mildly surprised that no one had linked to it from this thread yet.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Taylor gotten a completed film out so far? It seems like his projects all have stalled along the way.

Didn't he direct a movie starring Michael W. Smith a few years ago?

Right, but no one saw it and we can't remember what it was called. And for some of us, the idea of the two working together in the first place was a bit strange.

I agree with the sentiment, though -- the idea that it seems like there hasn't been a completed film to this point. I wonder how he's making a living.

Edited by Persona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Save Blue Like Jazz ... by making a donation.

I gotta say, I wonder about the legality of all this. I mean, I'm sure it's LEGAL, but I also have a feeling that it could be really COMPLICATED, at least based on some comments that Kevin Smith made a little while ago ("We got some lawyers to look at it, and it's a f*****g nightmare to accept donations to make a movie. A tax nightmare, it sounded so good in theory").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, but no one saw it and we can't remember what it was called. And for some of us, the idea of the two working together in the first place was a bit strange.

FWIT, Second Chance is by far the best "Christian movie" I've ever seen. Funny, biting, a call for social justice. If only as many churches would play it as played the pabulum of other "Christian movies."

I gotta say, I wonder about the legality of all this. I mean, I'm sure it's LEGAL, but I also have a feeling that it could be really COMPLICATED, at least based on some comments that Kevin Smith made a little while ago ("We got some lawyers to look at it, and it's a f*****g nightmare to accept donations to make a movie. A tax nightmare, it sounded so good in theory").

Given the way movies generally run their finances(by cooking the books so that, for tax purposes, they never make a profit), I'm not surprised that anyone trying the Hollywood method of filmmaking would think it a nightmare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like the Blue Like Jazz is already $6,000 over their fundraising goal, with 19 days left to go.

Now we'll see if Taylor can pull the movie together and actually begin production on the 25th. I find it interesting that the site lists the project location as Nashville. Will it be standing in for Portland?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0