I have not seen James Cameron's latest mega-movie Avatar, but I'm sure at some point I will. Not because I love science fiction but because I am the the mother of a 13-year-old boy who loves science fiction. I can do a mean Yoda impersonation thanks to many viewings of Star Wars with said son. So I was intrigued when I saw Ross Douthat's op-ed piece, "Heaven and Nature," on Avatar in the New York Times yesterday.
At first I was nodding in agreement with Douthat as he pounced on the "capitalistic excess" and Cameron's "apologia for pantheism," but by the time I got to the end I had switched sides. Douthat's argument doesn't fully hold up. Sure, I can see how Avatar with its blue-skinned beauties living in an idyllic world could make the Hollywood types swoon -- a semi-religious experience minus the religion. And yet, aren't we all, even we Christians, meant to be in some sort of spiritual communion with the natural world around us? I'm not talking about worshiping a tree, but you don't have to look too far off the beaten Catholic path to remember that one of our greats -- St. Francis of Assisi -- often waxed poetic about the wonders of the natural world, of Brother Sun and Sister Moon. I know St. Francis. St. Francis is a friend of mine. And let me tell you, St. Francis was no pantheist.
I'd even argue that Douthat's take on the "mystical Force" in Star Wars being of a pantheistic vein is off the mark. As mentioned above, I've seen my share of Star Wars and I don't get pantheism. I get good vs. evil, which inevitably brings me back to Judeo-Christian religious beliefs, not sun gods and water fairies. Same goes for Douthat's take on The Lion King, which was my son's all-time favorite movie when he was a preschooler. Yes, it focuses on the "circle of life," but there is a circle of life, whether we worship the One True God or are dabbling in New Age niceties. In fact, when I wrote my first book, Parenting a Grieving Child, I suggested parents use movies like The Lion King to help their children understand life and death.
Maybe after I view Avatar for myself, I'll see Douthat's point, although I tend to doubt it. As I see it, we are created by our Creator to live among all His other creations. We are connected -- spiritually, physically and otherwise -- whether we like it or not.
Toward the end of his column, Douthat states:
"Religion exists, in part, precisely because humans aren’t at home amid these cruel rhythms. We stand half inside the natural world and half outside it. We’re beasts with self-consciousness, predators with ethics, mortal creatures who yearn for immortality.
"This is an agonized position, and if there’s no escape upward — or no God to take on flesh and come among us, as the Christmas story has it — a deeply tragic one.
"Pantheism offers a different sort of solution: a downward exit, an abandonment of our tragic self-consciousness, a re-merger with the natural world our ancestors half-escaped millennia ago.
"But except as dust and ashes, Nature cannot take us back."
Ah, but there's the rub. Nature does take us back as dust and ash, and we become part of the circle of life.
To read Douthat's full column, click HERE.
Visit 
Posts
4 comments:
It strikes me as a science fiction takeoff on "Dances With Wolves." Derivative. Not terribly original. Maybe not a bad thing, but also not fodder for widespread acclaim or attack. "Avatar" looks like a very expensive Hollywood movie that played it safe.
I saw Mr Douthat's op-ed, and I think he's reading too deeply into the film. But then again, I haven't watched "Avatar," so I may be all wet on this.
I have not seen "Avatar." I do not see a problem with the other films Mr. Douthat mentions. May the force be with him!
I saw the movie and I was not previously a fan of Cameron's work. But I think Douthat (who happens to be one of my favorite columnists) reads too much into it. The movie does not promote pantheism, but in fact the belief in a supreme being, one whose presence cannot be fully participated in without effort on the part of the "creature."
If anything, I would argue that the public response to movies like Avatar, and even the pantheism that Douthat mentions, reveals a natural human desire to believe in something bigger than the self. There are many starting points in pagan beliefs, pantheism, etc., that could in fact be used to reach many people. We miss these opportunities all too often by condemning something we don't fully understand before realizing that there may be some truth to the situation, some truth which has the potential to lead to the fullness of truth. It's called conversion and it has to start somewhere. Our job as Christians is to facilitate that process.
It is interesting how many people throw the word pantheism around, Douthat included, without discussing the man who created the term: John Toland. He was a 17th century English Dissenter and philosopher who may have been a friend of John Locke and was a follower of Locke, Spinoza and Bruno. Bruno was put to death by the Inquisition. There materialist religious views were connected to their political views. Catholics often supported a monarchy, Anglicans a constitutional monarchy and materialists or pantheists a republic. One god equals one-man rule whereas god in everything was supported by those who supported popular rule or republicanism.
I have seen Avatar and all I could think when I saw the Na'vi and thier interconnectedness with their planet was Pantheism and John Toland! The movie and Toland are both worth taking a look at. Margaret Jacob's The Radical Enlightenment is a good start for Toland.
It is encouraging if Douthat is right and Cameron is successful in popularizing some of Toland's and Bruno's ideas as they helped move Europe beyond much of the religious superstition and fanaticism and political authoritarianism of the seventeenth century and Eywa knows our planet could deal with a decline in the 21rst century versions of them!
Post a Comment