Rand is Spinning in Her Grave

The production company for the movie Atlas Shrugged, Part 1 has announced that they will replace 100,000 copies of the title sheet that was included in the DVD and Blu-Ray edition of the movie. Apparently there was a mistake in the text:

The 1957 novel, Atlas Shrugged, is known in philosophical and political circles for presenting a cogent argument advocating a society driven by rational self-interest. On the back of the film’s retail DVD and Blu-ray however, the movie’s synopsis contradictorily states “AYN RAND’s timeless novel of courage and self-sacrifice comes to life…

That should be self-interest, not self-sacrifice. Revel in the irony.

Fantasy and Myth

Our friend and new neighbor James McGrath is a devoted fan of science fiction. He has argued that science fiction stories are the myths for our age, since science fiction frequently explores some of the same territory as myth and religion. He’s even edited a collection of religious criticism of science fiction stories, Religion and Science Fiction, which I recently picked up. Glad I did, since as soon as I laid hands on it, my midichlorians miraculously doubled.

In my mind, the idea of science fiction as myth raises a question: where does that leave the self-consciously mythic genre of fantasy? This question has recently sparked a conversation across the blogosphere.

I think D.G. Myers started things off by suggesting that Fantasy is a Genre of Christianity. Right off the bat there’s some strong evidence that he’s right, given how many fantasy series draw from Christianity: Lord of the Rings, Narnia and even Harry Potter to some degree. Myers further draws a direct line between the “other realm” of magic and the “other realm” of heaven.

E.D. Kain at The League of Ordinary Gentlemen disagrees, suggesting that fantasy is not inherently Christian, but rather has been rooted in a certain Anglo-Saxon tradition as an accident of its birth:

Perhaps the confluence of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, and G.K. Chesterton – all men with a peculiar aversion to first and middle names – gave birth to contemporary fantasy as we know it in some lucky stroke of happenstance. Perhaps we should blame the Anglican Church for the rise of fantasy. While Catholics were busy burning witches and Lutherans and other protestant groups were busy taking all the fun and mysterious things out of Christianity, Anglicans were busy walking the tightrope between. Tolkien was Catholic, true, but a Catholic in a distinctly Anglican setting.

Kain later clarifies and expands a bit on this, acknowledging that the effect is partially market driven:

I think it’s basically true that fantasy as a genre of popular literature was born and raised in the Anglosphere, and that the form has been adopted in other non-English-speaking cultures – for whatever reason and perhaps simply because of the respective economic empires of the UK and USA.

Meanwhile, Adam Serwer wants to clarify that the discussion is about “high fantasy,” which is a fair point. The other major fantasy sub-genre, Sword ‘n Sorcery, is much darker. Not surprising, since its father was Robert Howard, part of Lovecraft’s circle.

There’s an old story that Tolkien considered an Arthurian setting for his stories, but discarded it as “too Christian.” He wanted a darker world where he could have huge wars and lots of violent adventure, so he set his Christian epic in a pagan setting. I think he got the balance right, by which I mean that the pagan elements swamped the Christian elements. Far better than Narnia.

Maybe what gives fantasy it’s strength is this balance between the high-minded messages and the visceral adventure. There are mythic elements, but they are balanced by gosh-wow magic, sword fights, chainmail bikinis and loincloths. Any thoughts?

Christian Zombie Killer

I think this finally proves my contention that the zombie fad has peaked and will soon lurch off into the sunset:

Via Amazon: “In this one-of-kind approach to teaching about sin, grace, and salvation, The Christian Zombie Killers Handbook tracks the fictional life of Ben Forman and offers solid Bible teaching to help readers understand the gravity and consequences of life without God, of life as a zombie.”

Interestingly, Geds at Accidental Historian and Michael Mock of Mock Ramblings are both reviewing Night of the Living Dead Christian, which is another work of Christian fiction to use zombies. Trend? Maybe.

The author of Night of the Living Dead Christian, Matt Mikalatos, seems a reasonably cool guy. He’s joined the discussion over at both blogs now. One interesting thing is how different his use of zombies is from Kinley. In Mikalatos’ work, zombies are a metaphor for a certain kind of Christian; the kind who doesn’t want to think but just wants to follow the herd. In Kinley’s work – just judging from reviews – zombies are a metaphor for our sinful nature.

Let’s All Go Step on Pat Buchanan’s Lawn

Pat Buchanan is lamenting the facts that kids these days just aren’t as respectful of white Christian men as they use to be back in his day. His new book, Suicide Of A Superpower, seems to be a lot of grousing about how we’re turning our back of tradition, religion and whiteness. Talking Points Memo pulled out some representative quotes:

When the faith dies, the culture dies, the civilization dies, the people die. That is the progression. And as the faith that gave birth to the West is dying in the West, peoples of European descent from the steppes of Russia to the coast of California have begun to die out, as the Third World treks north to claim the estate. The last decade provided corroborating if not conclusive proof that we are in the Indian summer of our civilization.

TPM calls many of these quotes racist – which they are – but it’s a tired, whinging, resentful kind of racism:

The white population will begin to shrink and, should present birth rates persist, slowly disappear. Hispanics already comprise 42 percent of New Mexico’s population, 37 percent of California’s, 38 percent of Texas’s, and over half the population of Arizona under the age of twenty. ……. Mexico is moving north. Ethnically, linguistically, and culturally, the verdict of 1848 is being overturned. Will this Mexican nation within a nation advance the goals of the Constitution—to “insure domestic tranquility” and “make us a more perfect union”? Or has our passivity in the face of this invasion imperiled our union?

… because, you see, only white folk really understand freedom.

It’s always irritating to see a Catholic like Buchanan talk like this. I’m sitting here in New York, where the first State Constitution would have made Buchanan ineligible to run for office. Buchanan’s presidential runs would have been unthinkable for most of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

But Buchanan, having finally been welcomed into the fold of “real Americans,” is now willing to turn around and gripe about those other Catholics from Mexico who just don’t understand what America is all about.

Ken Ham is Shocked! … Shocked!

The latest book to start a buzz amongst the bloggers who focus on American Christianity is Randall Stephens and Karl Giberson’s new book, The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age. It seems you can think of The Anointed as a follow-up to Mark Noll’s The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, which concluded that the scandal was that there wasn’t much mind.

“The Anointed” refers to those people who have been tapped as authorities within the Evangelical community on various subject, such as history and science. The authors ask, “Why do tens of millions of Americans prefer to get their science from Ken Ham, founder of the creationist Answers in Genesis, who has no scientific expertise, rather than from his fellow evangelical Francis Collins, current Director of the National Institutes of Health?”

One way or another, the book has shocked Ken Ham and his group Answers in Genesis. Ham has already suggested that Stephens and Giberson are sheep in wolves clothing. Stephens was particularly amused by this part of Ham’s self-defense:

The authors also asserted that ICR [Institute for Creation Research] and AiG argue that evolution is “responsible for much of what’s wrong with the world” (p. 36). Answers in Genesis has never stated or implied this. We have both—in countless articles and even in the 2008 online debate between Ham and Dr. Giberson—declared instead that the teaching of evolution has caused many to doubt or disbelieve the Bible.*

To which Stephens replies with this image from the AIG website:

This one’s even better than the evolution tree picture. Of course, given how incompetently the “creation” side is firing, I’d almost think this was one of ours.