Entertainment and the Death of a Culture
I want to present one important secular voice who speaks to these matters. I refer to Neil Postman (1931-2003) and his very important 1985 volume, Amusing Ourselves to Death. I have quoted from this book often, but it pays to share even more of it here. By offering some choice quotes I might convince some of you to go out and get a copy and read it for yourself. Postman looks at this further in Ch. 11: “The Huxleyan Warning.” He starts with these words: “There are two ways by which the spirit of a culture may be shriveled. In the first — the Orwellian — culture becomes a prison. In the second — the Huxleyan — culture becomes a burlesque.” (p. 155)
As we all should know by now, the best way a tyrant can keep the masses in control and prevent them from challenging their overlords is to keep them distracted – usually with endless, brainless entertainment. It is the old ‘bread and circuses’ routine to keep people enslaved without them really even knowing it.
Such is the all-powerful impact of entertainment that most Western churches have also fell under its spell. So many seem to think the only way to compete with the world is to become just like the world. Just consider the recent “strip show-like” entertainment offered at a men’s conference and all the bruhaha which followed from that with Mark Driscoll and John Lindell.
Thankfully some Christian leaders have been calling out this obsession with entertainment. One voice in the wilderness in this regard was A. W. Tozer. He often spoke out against this. For example, he said that the church
appears to have decided that if she cannot conquer the great god Entertainment she may as well join forces with him and make what use she can of his powers. So today we have the astonishing spectacle of millions of dollars being poured into the unholy job of providing earthly entertainment for the so-called sons of heaven. Religious entertainment is in many places rapidly crowding out the serious things of God. Many churches these days have become little more than poor theatres where fifth-rate “producers” peddle their shoddy wares with the full approval of evangelical leaders who can even quote a holy text in defense of their delinquency. And hardly a man dares raise his voice against it.
And again:
It is now common practice in most evangelical churches to offer the people, especially the young people, a maximum of entertainment and a minimum of serious instruction. It is scarcely possible in most places to get anyone to attend a meeting where the only attraction is God. One can only conclude that God’s professed children are bored with Him, for they must be wooed to attend a meeting with a stick of striped candy in the form of religious movies, games and refreshments.
One last remark by Tozer: “Jesus Christ never offered amusement or entertainment for His disciples, but in our day we have to offer both if we are going to get the people – because they are common Christians.”
But here I want to present one important secular voice who speaks to these matters. I refer to Neil Postman (1931-2003) and his very important 1985 volume, Amusing Ourselves to Death. I have quoted from this book often, but it pays to share even more of it here. By offering some choice quotes I might convince some of you to go out and get a copy and read it for yourself.
His opening thoughts as found in the Foreword of the book I have quoted before, but they are germane to his whole argument and thus worth sharing again:
We were keeping our eye on 1984. When the year came and the prophecy didn’t, thoughtful Americans sang softly in praise of themselves. The roots of liberal democracy had held. Wherever else the terror had happened, we, at least, had not been visited by Orwellian nightmares.
But we had forgotten that alongside Orwell’s dark vision, there was another – slightly older, slightly less well known, equally chilling: Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. Contrary to common belief even among the educated, Huxley and Orwell did not prophesy the same thing. Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley’s vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.
What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance.
-
Read God’s Law for Maximal Application
Written by William B. Fullilove |
Tuesday, November 8, 2022
The Divines provide us a powerful biblical training that forbids us from adopting a merely privatized faith. Their call on our lives is to emulate their patterns of interpretation and to apply God’s law to every area of life. This is what godliness looks like.When we confess our sins in worship, we confess both the wrong we’ve done and the good we’ve left undone. In so doing, we follow a long Christian tradition that deeply considers the full implications of God’s commandments, reading them expansively—never narrowly—to search out both the positive and negative implications of each commandment for the Christian life.
It’s this maximal reading of the law, a thirst to apply the principles—not merely the letter—of God’s commands into every area of life, that we see modeled throughout the Bible and with great depth in our Reformed tradition.
In the Law Itself
We see this model envisioned in the way Leviticus 6 works out the implications of the eighth commandment:
The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “If anyone sins and commits a breach of faith against the LORD by deceiving his neighbor in a matter of deposit or security, or through robbery, or if he has oppressed his neighbor or has found something lost and lied about it, swearing falsely—in any of all the things that people do and sin thereby—if he has sinned and has realized his guilt and will restore what he took by robbery or what he got by oppression or the deposit that was committed to him or the lost thing that he found or anything about which he has sworn falsely, he shall restore it in full and shall add a fifth to it, and give it to him to whom it belongs on the day he realizes his guilt” (Lev. 6:1–5).
Leviticus makes clear that “stealing” is far more than simply taking something from your neighbor.
Deception in issues of a deposit, oppression of another, finding something lost and avoiding returning it, misleading others —all these, and by implication even more, would count as violations of the spirit of the eighth commandment. The law itself indicates the commandments should be read expansively, not narrowly.
By Our Savior
We see the same model in the words of Jesus in Matthew 19:
And behold, a man came up to him, saying, “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?” And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” He said to him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” The young man said to him, “All these I have kept. What do I still lack?” Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” When the young man heard this he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions (Matt. 19:16–22).Christ’s point, of course, was that the young man’s piety was not as exemplary as he would have hoped. True piety doesn’t simply end with avoiding sins of commission, being able to say, “These I have kept.” Keeping the law includes avoiding sins of omission as well.
Related Posts:
-
The New Pinocchio Swaps Conscience for “Authenticity”
As for lessons learned, Pinocchio in 2022 does not turn into the boy that Geppetto had wished for, as in 1940. He remains a puppet, no doubt as a sign of his authenticity and acceptance for himself as is. That suggests an underlying truth—children brought up with such beliefs can never really grow up.
American parents used to trust Disney to charm their kids with beautiful fairy tales. Most such tales were European in origin, but Disney Americanized them, made them more democratic, less bloody minded, and ultimately hopeful. It started with animations, then added amusement parks, then any number of other things that made American technical ingenuity and prosperity gentle and pleasant, until it became the most important educator of the imagination of children in the entire media industry.
Nowadays, Disney is reeducating American children to believe in a woke agenda most Americans don’t share, wouldn’t vote for, but might somehow be tricked into financing when their attention is diverted. It seems to have traded delightful surprises for involvement in political scandals, as in Florida, or media scandals over every aspect of casting and plot. Indeed, it courts scandal as a marketing strategy, dividing Americans rather than uniting them, and using its reputation to make it seem as though the very people who gave Disney their vaunted reputation are immoral. What happened?
There are many aspects to this very important story, and some thoughtful conservative should take the time to elucidate them. All I can do today is point out the educational aspect of this change—What is the role of the imagination in education?—by comparing Disney’s Pinocchio (1940) with the new Disney+ movie directed by Robert Zemeckis, starring none other than America’s last lovable actor, Tom Hanks.
Pinocchio is a story about how children learn to become moral. The puppet is a metaphor not only for helplessness but also for the way children are made to do what they do by their parents—it points to our imitative nature, and much of the comedy depends on the awkwardness of the children, who are self-important without being self-aware in their imitation, and the foibles, to say no more, of the adults, who recognize their faults magnified in the small versions of themselves they have made, the focus of their love and life. The puppeteer Geppetto’s wish upon a star, to have a real boy, is every parent’s wish that their child turn out right.
Walt Disney’s contribution to Carlo Collodi’s original story, Jiminy Cricket, is a metaphor for conscience. Jiminy defines it by an old and trusty adage: “The still, small voice that people won’t listen to. That’s just the problem with the world today!” It’s not hard to know what’s right and wrong in many cases, indeed, but it’s hard to do it, it comes at a cost, and without certainty of reward. That problem of character, rather than of knowledge, might not be solvable. After all, our admiration of good character depends to some extent on our knowledge of its rarity!
But in this moment when Jiminy introduces himself to Pinocchio, he gets so carried away with confidence in the power of morality that he leaves character behind, taking it for granted. Instead, he insists on the intellectual part of morality and quickly gets himself in trouble: “The world is full of temptations. They’re the wrong things that seem right at the time. But even though the right things may seem wrong sometimes, sometimes the wrong things may be right at the wrong time, or vice versa. Understand?”
Read More
Related Posts: -
No Squishy Love, No Brutal Truth
My fear and concern about so many of today’s debates is that even if we win many battles, we may still lose the war. We may protect truth, but what have we gained if our triumph comes through scorched-earth battles that treat other believers as the enemy and grind them under foot?
Sin has made our vision opaque and our minds dull. We do not see God for who he really is and ourselves for who we really are. We think far too little of God and far too highly of ourselves. On our own we are doomed to look blindly and think badly.
But as our inner nature is renewed by the Word, our vision becomes progressively clearer. Our minds become sharp. We put aside the ugly lies we once believed and embrace the beautiful truths. Thinking well—seeing and understanding the world as it truly is—is a privilege and obligation of every believer.
God’s desire is not merely that we reflect his truth in our conclusions, but that we reflect his character in our deliberations.But the privilege and obligation upon us is not merely to believe the right things. We also need to come to those beliefs in the right way. It’s not enough to arrive at theological conclusions that reflect the mind of God; it’s also important to reach those conclusions in a way that reflects the character of God. God’s desire is not merely that we reflect his truth in our conclusions, but that we reflect his character in our deliberations.
Read More
Related Posts:
