This last Sunday evening we finished off our Financial Peace University class. Over the course of the last thirteen weeks, I had a front row seat to see some exciting things happen. The class of about 15 “family units” (FPU’s term that includes both couples and singles) paid off $15,690.00 in debt. Because of Dave Ramsey’s emphasis on tithing, I was interested in how the class might affect the class in the area of stewardship. So I asked our business administrator to track the tithing patterns from three months before the class started to the three months of the class. Aggregate tithing (the first time that phrase has been used on the internet) went up from an average of around $7,000.00 to around $9,000.000 during the course of the class. And there were other success stories.
In one couple, the husband went out and got a new job and they also yanked their Direct TV (A major sacrifice for them). Another couple decided to completely pay off their home mortgage (like this person). One lady decided that she could have substantial amount in savings and still retire by a certain age is she got aggressive in her savings. Another class member saved over $1,000.00 a year when one of the lessons led him to shop around his homeowner’s insurance with some other companies. One retired couple said that they were communicating more in general now as a result of working together on a budget. We even had one non-church member take the class after she read about it on Dave Ramsey’s website.
Overall it was a positive experience. I will mention two obstacles:
First, the course is expensive. The main teaching materials (DVD’s, facilitator’s book, etc) is $300.00, a sizeable chunk for our church. Additionally each student’s book is $90.00, another sizeable chunk for people who need financial assistance anyway. We did have some folks in our church who provided partial scholarships for families who needed one. Overall, there wasn’t anyone I’m aware of who didn’t take the class because they couldn’t afford it.
Second, the course is long. It is 13 weeks, two hours a week. That length of time knocks off a fourth of the calendar. It also makes scheduling other events in the life of the church difficult. We ran it on Sunday evenings after our worship service and it made for long evenings for the facilitators.
But despite these two obstacles, Financial Peace is well worth it. Ramsey’s last lesson may be his best. He puts financial peace in a larger context of proper stewardship of all things. I’d recommend it for any church interested in training people how to handle money according to Biblical principles and common sense.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Monday, November 26, 2007
This is My Father’s World
A Review of Gilead by Marilynne Robinson
“Grace is not so poor a thing that it cannot present itself in any number of ways.” p. 240
Grace surrounds us, as though Creation itself is insufficient to contain the evidence of God’s proud pleasure for His world. This world in which we live, though marred by sin, still declares the glories of God.
Robinson does the best job I’ve seen in capturing the grace-drenched world in which each of us live, move, and have our being. Gilead, the 2005 Pulitzer prize winner, depicts the story of a dying minister who is reflecting back on his own life, and reflecting forward on the life of his son. John Ames is 76 years old and facing death of a weak heart. This news prompts him to reflect on his life with his much younger wife and his seven year old son, the offspring of their May/December union.
The narrative of Gilead consists of a series of these thoughts, jotted down to his son, in which John shares about God, life, pain, forgiveness and grace. He also shares the passionate relationship between his own grandfather (a one-eyed, fiery abolitionist minister who worked closely with John Brown) and his father, an equally stubborn pacifist.
Gilead is a novel about fathers and sons, and their relationships both loyal and prodigal. Gilead also captures the often complicated relationship between pastor and parishioners. Marilynne Robinson has a writer’s eye. Her eye is every bit as exacting and precise as the grandfather’s own one eye that John lives in fear of offending.
For example, it is a rare gift that can see the grace of God in a child’s bubble:
“I saw a bubble float past my window, fat and wobbly and ripening toward that dragonfly blue they turn right before they burst. So I looked down at the yard and there you were, you and your mother blowing bubbles at the cat, such a barrage of them that the poor beast was beside herself at the glut of opportunity. She was actually leaping in the air, our insouciant Soapy! Some of the bubbles drifted up through the branches, even above the trees. You two were too intent on the cat to see the celestial consequences of your worldly endeavors. They were very lovely. Your mother is wearing her blue dress and you are wearing your red shirt and you were kneeling on the ground together with Soapy between and that efflugence of bubbles rising, and so much laughter. Ah, this life, this world.” p. 9
A walk to church becomes an opportunity to reflect on baptism and the newness of life that believers associate with water.
“That mention of Feuerbach and joy reminded me of something I saw early one morning a few years ago as I was walking up toward the church. There was a young couple, strolling along a half a block ahead of me. The sun had come up brilliantly after a heavy rain and the trees were glistening and very wet. On some impulse, plain exhuberence, I suppose, the fellow jumped up and caught hold of a branch, and a storm of luminous water came pouring on the two of them, and they laughed and took off running, the girl sweeping water off her hair and her dress as if she were a little bit disgusted, but she wasn’t. It was a beautiful thing to see…it is easy to believe in such moments that water was made primarily for blessing, and only secondarily for growing vegetables or doing the wash. I wish I had paid more attention to it. My list of regrets may seem unusual, but who can know that they are, really. This is an interesting planet. It deserves all the attention you can give it.” (p. 27-28)
Most of the time evangelicals engage with culture, we do so in an adversarial fashion. We poke and prod for hidden messages, count up profanities and double entendres, and deplore the God-forsaken wasteland of popular culture. Books like Gilead remind me that there is no corner of either our world or of our culture where God is not at work. The fact that even a secular jury awarded this novel the Pulitzer gives me hope.
All too often I’m overcome with the difficulties and obstacles of this life. Any random day on this blog gives evidence of the relatively minor difficulties that I encounter from time to time. Gilead is itself quite a gift in reminding us how wonderful our God-blessed lives are.
Marilynne Robinson rightly sees that it is not the Devil, but rather God who is in the details of our lives.
Grace surrounds us, as though Creation itself is insufficient to contain the evidence of God’s proud pleasure for His world. This world in which we live, though marred by sin, still declares the glories of God.
Robinson does the best job I’ve seen in capturing the grace-drenched world in which each of us live, move, and have our being. Gilead, the 2005 Pulitzer prize winner, depicts the story of a dying minister who is reflecting back on his own life, and reflecting forward on the life of his son. John Ames is 76 years old and facing death of a weak heart. This news prompts him to reflect on his life with his much younger wife and his seven year old son, the offspring of their May/December union.
The narrative of Gilead consists of a series of these thoughts, jotted down to his son, in which John shares about God, life, pain, forgiveness and grace. He also shares the passionate relationship between his own grandfather (a one-eyed, fiery abolitionist minister who worked closely with John Brown) and his father, an equally stubborn pacifist.
Gilead is a novel about fathers and sons, and their relationships both loyal and prodigal. Gilead also captures the often complicated relationship between pastor and parishioners. Marilynne Robinson has a writer’s eye. Her eye is every bit as exacting and precise as the grandfather’s own one eye that John lives in fear of offending.
For example, it is a rare gift that can see the grace of God in a child’s bubble:
“I saw a bubble float past my window, fat and wobbly and ripening toward that dragonfly blue they turn right before they burst. So I looked down at the yard and there you were, you and your mother blowing bubbles at the cat, such a barrage of them that the poor beast was beside herself at the glut of opportunity. She was actually leaping in the air, our insouciant Soapy! Some of the bubbles drifted up through the branches, even above the trees. You two were too intent on the cat to see the celestial consequences of your worldly endeavors. They were very lovely. Your mother is wearing her blue dress and you are wearing your red shirt and you were kneeling on the ground together with Soapy between and that efflugence of bubbles rising, and so much laughter. Ah, this life, this world.” p. 9
A walk to church becomes an opportunity to reflect on baptism and the newness of life that believers associate with water.
“That mention of Feuerbach and joy reminded me of something I saw early one morning a few years ago as I was walking up toward the church. There was a young couple, strolling along a half a block ahead of me. The sun had come up brilliantly after a heavy rain and the trees were glistening and very wet. On some impulse, plain exhuberence, I suppose, the fellow jumped up and caught hold of a branch, and a storm of luminous water came pouring on the two of them, and they laughed and took off running, the girl sweeping water off her hair and her dress as if she were a little bit disgusted, but she wasn’t. It was a beautiful thing to see…it is easy to believe in such moments that water was made primarily for blessing, and only secondarily for growing vegetables or doing the wash. I wish I had paid more attention to it. My list of regrets may seem unusual, but who can know that they are, really. This is an interesting planet. It deserves all the attention you can give it.” (p. 27-28)
Most of the time evangelicals engage with culture, we do so in an adversarial fashion. We poke and prod for hidden messages, count up profanities and double entendres, and deplore the God-forsaken wasteland of popular culture. Books like Gilead remind me that there is no corner of either our world or of our culture where God is not at work. The fact that even a secular jury awarded this novel the Pulitzer gives me hope.
All too often I’m overcome with the difficulties and obstacles of this life. Any random day on this blog gives evidence of the relatively minor difficulties that I encounter from time to time. Gilead is itself quite a gift in reminding us how wonderful our God-blessed lives are.
Marilynne Robinson rightly sees that it is not the Devil, but rather God who is in the details of our lives.
(I'm not sure of the proper etiquette for a reading hat tip, but I first encountered this book as a review in the Rabbit Room).
Sunday, November 25, 2007
A Book Idea
Part of the greatest fun of the annual SBL meeting has nothing to do with friends or papers. It’s all about the books. Imagine a couple of football fields covered with religious publishing companies from all over the world and you get some idea of the SBL Book exhibit. It is a bibliophile’s dream. Frankly, when every year when I see this set-up I think to myself. “Surely I can write a book on something…” (I mean a book that people will actually read).
Because of its focus on ministry instead of on academics, I was surprised to see the Alban Institute with a booth set up. The Alban Institute has published some of the best works on the Intentional Interim Ministry. (Temporary Shepherds and Healthy Congregations: A Systems Approach are two of my favorites). While there, I spoke to their publishing director and gave him my “elevator pitch” for a book idea I’d been running though my head for awhile.
One possible thought I’ve had is in the Fall of 2008, I’ll apply for a sabbatical for the following year (2009-2010). During that year I will find a church in need of intentional interim work and move with our family to that location. I would like it to be located far away from the Bible Belt so that I will be more of an outsider going in. I’ll then lead the church through the Intentional Interim process for a year and write up the results as both an introduction to Intentional Interim work and as a case study of how it might work. Interestingly, it was the process of blogging the various narratives about Susan Song which lead to this idea.
The publishing director seemed open to the concept. (Of course, every publisher nods their heads and agrees with you at the meeting, they keep their options open that way). He did say “Well you know Taran, not every church needs the Intentional Interim process. For us to be interested in this work, you will need an unusual church situation and a clear instance where the process was definitely needed.”
Reading between the lines, I said “You mean, if my family and I endure a year of pain and misery assisting a highly dysfunctional church, then that would make a better book for you?”
“Exactly!!” was his response.
This is a difficult situation to plan out. For example, how do you tell what church will be without a pastor in fall of 2009? The director of the Center for Congregational Health has offered his assistance with placement. There are also some hurdles to overcome at my own institution where my supervisors might not consider this proposal academic enough. But the largest hurdles to jump would be family concerns as fall of 2009 would be the first year of high school for Scooter and the first year of Middle school for Skeeter. Something to think about.
Because of its focus on ministry instead of on academics, I was surprised to see the Alban Institute with a booth set up. The Alban Institute has published some of the best works on the Intentional Interim Ministry. (Temporary Shepherds and Healthy Congregations: A Systems Approach are two of my favorites). While there, I spoke to their publishing director and gave him my “elevator pitch” for a book idea I’d been running though my head for awhile.
One possible thought I’ve had is in the Fall of 2008, I’ll apply for a sabbatical for the following year (2009-2010). During that year I will find a church in need of intentional interim work and move with our family to that location. I would like it to be located far away from the Bible Belt so that I will be more of an outsider going in. I’ll then lead the church through the Intentional Interim process for a year and write up the results as both an introduction to Intentional Interim work and as a case study of how it might work. Interestingly, it was the process of blogging the various narratives about Susan Song which lead to this idea.
The publishing director seemed open to the concept. (Of course, every publisher nods their heads and agrees with you at the meeting, they keep their options open that way). He did say “Well you know Taran, not every church needs the Intentional Interim process. For us to be interested in this work, you will need an unusual church situation and a clear instance where the process was definitely needed.”
Reading between the lines, I said “You mean, if my family and I endure a year of pain and misery assisting a highly dysfunctional church, then that would make a better book for you?”
“Exactly!!” was his response.
This is a difficult situation to plan out. For example, how do you tell what church will be without a pastor in fall of 2009? The director of the Center for Congregational Health has offered his assistance with placement. There are also some hurdles to overcome at my own institution where my supervisors might not consider this proposal academic enough. But the largest hurdles to jump would be family concerns as fall of 2009 would be the first year of high school for Scooter and the first year of Middle school for Skeeter. Something to think about.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
San Diego
I’ve undergone radio silence for the last few days, recovering from an onslaught of tryptophan…Last Friday through Tuesday I spent in San Diego at the national Society of Biblical Literature meeting. As always I found the trip delightfully engaging, stimulating and at times frustrating.
San Diego is a beautiful city (I shudder to think how amazing it is in the summer!). Our hotel was excellent and located right downtown. The convention center was a short walk away and located near a beautiful marina. We also made a quick trip to Coronado Island, which a local pastor refereed to as “Leave it to Beaver land”. The village is quaint and picturesque, which led one of my colleagues to refer to it as Stepford. I would’ve blogged some from the city, but was too cheap to spring for the $10.00 a day internet.
The annual meeting consists of a series of seminars on a veritable blizzard of topics in the fields of one of two religious organizations: the American Academy of Religion (AAR) and the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL). They are divided along disciplinary lines with the SBL consisting of papers in the fields of Old and New testaments, generally (though not exclusively) consisting of Jewish and Christian scholars. (See here for a look at some of the paper topics.) The AAR consists of everything else, a wide plethora of including other religions (Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism) and non-Biblical Studies fields (Church history, theology, etc.)
Participants at the SBL/AAR come in all different shapes and sizes. As you would expect, there are numerous Christians and non-Christians who participate representing state schools, Christian colleges, seminaries, Jewish seminaries, and churches.
Highlights:
Hearing N. T. Wright. Wright is the Anglican bishop of Durham who may be the foremost New Testament scholar of this day. I heard him give a lecture on the role of God in public discourse that was remarkable. As someone who has to deal with a multicultural context even more than we Americans do, it was impressive to hear him speak so passionately about the role of the church in public society. I think that his best line was that “tolerance is a low grade parody of agape love.” He argued that although contemporary culture holds up tolerance as the greatest goal, we need to press beyond tolerance to friendship, then phileo, then agape.
So what is the church’s role? Our role is to speak out as witnesses to society. That might entail martyrdom or other lesser stances. I think that in the evangelical community we have far too often been co-opted by power and snuggled up to governmental leaders for too long. Outstanding stuff.
I also attended several seminars but my favorite was one sponsored by the National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion which looked at the thorny issue of the divine conquests narratives of Joshua (and others) in which Yahweh commands the community of faith to wipe out the enemies of God. The session focused on how to raise that particular issue with students. It was a difficult topic and some of the proposed solutions were, quite frankly, disturbing in their treatment of the biblical narrative.
Another session was on the relationship between film and theology, an important and interesting topic. I think the best speaker was S. Brent Plate from TCU who argued that film makers are engaged in creating a world just as much as religion is. He mentioned two things in particular:
trailers and movie studio logos. Trailers oftentimes open with the phrase “In a world…” (as this article notes) while the logos of movie production studios often depict the logo coming down from “heaven.”
Lastly, and most importantly is the opportunity to connect with friends, old a new. This particular trip was enlivened by my great friend Bobby who drove down from Los Angeles to immerse himself in this alien religious subculture. I also spent time with several friends with whom I studied at Baylor. One of the high points of my stay was the dinner with my doctoral studies mentor, who goes out to eat with his former students every year. It is a great opportunity to reconnect.
San Diego is a beautiful city (I shudder to think how amazing it is in the summer!). Our hotel was excellent and located right downtown. The convention center was a short walk away and located near a beautiful marina. We also made a quick trip to Coronado Island, which a local pastor refereed to as “Leave it to Beaver land”. The village is quaint and picturesque, which led one of my colleagues to refer to it as Stepford. I would’ve blogged some from the city, but was too cheap to spring for the $10.00 a day internet.
The annual meeting consists of a series of seminars on a veritable blizzard of topics in the fields of one of two religious organizations: the American Academy of Religion (AAR) and the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL). They are divided along disciplinary lines with the SBL consisting of papers in the fields of Old and New testaments, generally (though not exclusively) consisting of Jewish and Christian scholars. (See here for a look at some of the paper topics.) The AAR consists of everything else, a wide plethora of including other religions (Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism) and non-Biblical Studies fields (Church history, theology, etc.)
Participants at the SBL/AAR come in all different shapes and sizes. As you would expect, there are numerous Christians and non-Christians who participate representing state schools, Christian colleges, seminaries, Jewish seminaries, and churches.
Highlights:
Hearing N. T. Wright. Wright is the Anglican bishop of Durham who may be the foremost New Testament scholar of this day. I heard him give a lecture on the role of God in public discourse that was remarkable. As someone who has to deal with a multicultural context even more than we Americans do, it was impressive to hear him speak so passionately about the role of the church in public society. I think that his best line was that “tolerance is a low grade parody of agape love.” He argued that although contemporary culture holds up tolerance as the greatest goal, we need to press beyond tolerance to friendship, then phileo, then agape.
So what is the church’s role? Our role is to speak out as witnesses to society. That might entail martyrdom or other lesser stances. I think that in the evangelical community we have far too often been co-opted by power and snuggled up to governmental leaders for too long. Outstanding stuff.
I also attended several seminars but my favorite was one sponsored by the National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion which looked at the thorny issue of the divine conquests narratives of Joshua (and others) in which Yahweh commands the community of faith to wipe out the enemies of God. The session focused on how to raise that particular issue with students. It was a difficult topic and some of the proposed solutions were, quite frankly, disturbing in their treatment of the biblical narrative.
Another session was on the relationship between film and theology, an important and interesting topic. I think the best speaker was S. Brent Plate from TCU who argued that film makers are engaged in creating a world just as much as religion is. He mentioned two things in particular:
trailers and movie studio logos. Trailers oftentimes open with the phrase “In a world…” (as this article notes) while the logos of movie production studios often depict the logo coming down from “heaven.”Lastly, and most importantly is the opportunity to connect with friends, old a new. This particular trip was enlivened by my great friend Bobby who drove down from Los Angeles to immerse himself in this alien religious subculture. I also spent time with several friends with whom I studied at Baylor. One of the high points of my stay was the dinner with my doctoral studies mentor, who goes out to eat with his former students every year. It is a great opportunity to reconnect.
With these friends we fight as much as we catch up. Each of us are passionate about our faith of course, but also with our fields. So we spend much time arguing and laughing and even some time crying. It was a marvelous, joyous time.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Rough Draft Feedback
So I read my flash fiction for the writer's group. Since my story is so short, I will reproduce it here and you won't have to go through the laborious process of clicking a link:
Mary looked up from the newspaper. “Jack, what do you know. Do you remember that high school guidance counselor, the one that said little Jimmy wasn’t ‘college material’?”
“Ummm-hmmmm” replied Jack as he carefully poured out the molasses on his biscuits. With a satisfied turn of the wrist, he managed both to stop the flow out of the jar and twist the lid back into place at the same time.
“She uhhh…she died. Last night in a car accident she was killed on Buncombe road.”
Jack was silent for a moment. “Well….she wasn’t very good at her job.”
The group consists of about eight undergrads and a new faculty member, an English prof. Since I was one of the first to read, folks were nice. Lest I rip them in return. The students and my caolleague each said positive things.
One of the students said "I really like the foreshadowing." I thought to myself "How can you have foreshadowing in a 100 word piece of fiction?!" She continued "I should've anticipated the death of the counselor by the way you mentioned the molasses being cut off."
Oh.
No wonder I wasn't an English major.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Because I'm the Mom
Although the term "Christian Comedian" is one I tend to flee from, Anita Renfroe may have me rethink that. Enjoy "Because I'm The Mom"
To see her on the CBS Morning show, click here.
To see her on the CBS Morning show, click here.
Monday, November 05, 2007
Cowboys Tight End
Dave posted (it's gone from You Tube now) an incredible run sans helmet by Jason Witten, the Dallas Cowboy's current tight end, from Sunday night. It reminded me of a run by their best ever tight end from a few Thanksgivings back...
How do I know he's their best ever? How many Super Bowls did Troy, Michael and Emmit win without him????
(that would be zero)
How do I know he's their best ever? How many Super Bowls did Troy, Michael and Emmit win without him????
(that would be zero)
Reel Life Dan
A milestone for our clan this Sunday evening. Due to a large fellowship on Saturday, our church took Sunday night off. At home, Kadie and I fed the kids and then took off to see a movie. What is significant is that this is the first time we’ve left Scooter in charge of her younger siblings for 2 hours so that we could see a movie. (Of course the theater is 1.3 miles from our home, which helps a lot).
Unfettered freedom I tell ya’!
In celebration, a movies review. May it not be the last.
We went to see the flick Dan in Real Life (DIRL) a romantic comedy for the middle aged, and further evidence I suppose that Kadie and I are easing our way into that particular demographic. It stars the likeable Steve Carell and the beautiful Juliet Binoche.
Carell plays Dan an advice columnist who is also a widower dealing with the onerous task of raising three daughters ages 9, 15, and 17. Like the cobbler whose kids have no shoes, Dan’s kids don’t have enough of him as a Dad. The youngest daughter wants his time, the oldest daughter his car and the middle daughter just wants him to disappear.
Every year he takes his brood to his parents’ home on Chesapeake Bay. He is joined there by his two brothers, his sister and all their assorted spouses and kids. The film plays out over three days as the assorted two dozen people engage in Pictionary, touch football, and family traditions like talent shows and walks on the beach.
The central narrative is generated by a chance encounter that Dan has with Marie (Juliet Binoche). Dan has been so overprotective of his daughters that his mom sends him away for some time by himself in the local town bookstore, named the Book and Tackle Shop, a name so small-town cute, it must really exist (Yep).
In the bookstore, Dan and Marie meet, awkwardly flirt and seem to make a connection. In a scene that demonstrates how intimacy can occur without physical contact, Dan shares with her about the loss of his wife which seems to surprise even himself. “I don’t usually talk much about her” he confesses.
After Dan returns to his parent’s home, he is brimming with excitement about his newfound friend and tells his family that he’s met someone special. Sharing in his joy is his younger brother Mitch who has brought home someone special as well. Mitch introduces his new girl friend to Dan and … it turns out to be Marie. The story then unfolds as Dan, Marie, and Mitch try to come to grips with this new reality.
Three things I didn’t like:
1. The Predictability of the Plot – This is usually a big one for me. If I’ve invested 30 minutes in a film and can tell you the direction it is going in, then the screenwriter (who has presumably spent more time with the story than I have) has done a poor job.
2. The Equation of Love and Attraction – Both Dan and his middle daughter (see below) equate these two distinctive realities. Part of the difficulty in adequately portraying love on film is the limits of the medium. Love takes a long time to build and an even longer time to maintain than two hours. I must confess that his criticism could be made of almost every film.
3. The Tidy Ending – The film ends and everyone (everyone!) is appropriately paired off with who they should be. Not hard feelings anywhere in sight. While this might make some people leave the theater happy, it doesn’t confront the messiness of life.
Three things I liked:
1. Steve Carell – I like him in the Office and in the two Almightys. He plays nice and funny well, but I didn’t know if he could play any drama. He does a very good job. Dan loves his family, but doesn’t always like them. Carell portrays well that delicate balance. Part of the emotional satisfaction at the end of the film (as he finds love again) is due to the investment that the film makes in depicting how deep his sense of loss is over his wife. The highest compliment I know is to say that half-way through the film I saw Dan on the screen, not Evan or Michael Scott.
2. The Relationship of the Father to his Daughters – Not many films get this right. In most films the dad is an idiot, or the kids are wise beyond their years…or both. But in this one, there is an entertaining dynamic that doesn’t shy away from the fact that parents and children can love each other desperately and still fight passionately. The most entertaining relationship is between Dan and his middle daughter Cara. Cara has met the boy of her dreams and Dan doesn’t think that she has any idea what love is about and grounds her when he sees her kissing her boyfriend in public.
Cara responds the way preteen and teen girls so often do—with tons and tons of drama. Brittney Robertson plays Cara in a melodramatic, over the top way…exactly the way teens and preteens so often behave. It’s not just that they say “The World is coming to an End!!!” They actually believe it that it is.
3. The Family –DIRL presents family as a mixture of joy and sorrow, best friends and bitter rivals. There is love, there is dysfunction, bad advice, and laughter. The family reunion setting highlights all of the attractions of family. Like other good movies about family (The Royal Tenenbaums comes to mind), it makes the viewer wish we could be a part of that family too.
Overall I recommend the movie. Like the proverbial bumble bee, this movie flies when it shouldn’t. The predictable, sit-com like plot is tiresome, but fortunately the film is not.
Unfettered freedom I tell ya’!
In celebration, a movies review. May it not be the last.
We went to see the flick Dan in Real Life (DIRL) a romantic comedy for the middle aged, and further evidence I suppose that Kadie and I are easing our way into that particular demographic. It stars the likeable Steve Carell and the beautiful Juliet Binoche.
Carell plays Dan an advice columnist who is also a widower dealing with the onerous task of raising three daughters ages 9, 15, and 17. Like the cobbler whose kids have no shoes, Dan’s kids don’t have enough of him as a Dad. The youngest daughter wants his time, the oldest daughter his car and the middle daughter just wants him to disappear.
Every year he takes his brood to his parents’ home on Chesapeake Bay. He is joined there by his two brothers, his sister and all their assorted spouses and kids. The film plays out over three days as the assorted two dozen people engage in Pictionary, touch football, and family traditions like talent shows and walks on the beach.
The central narrative is generated by a chance encounter that Dan has with Marie (Juliet Binoche). Dan has been so overprotective of his daughters that his mom sends him away for some time by himself in the local town bookstore, named the Book and Tackle Shop, a name so small-town cute, it must really exist (Yep).
In the bookstore, Dan and Marie meet, awkwardly flirt and seem to make a connection. In a scene that demonstrates how intimacy can occur without physical contact, Dan shares with her about the loss of his wife which seems to surprise even himself. “I don’t usually talk much about her” he confesses.
After Dan returns to his parent’s home, he is brimming with excitement about his newfound friend and tells his family that he’s met someone special. Sharing in his joy is his younger brother Mitch who has brought home someone special as well. Mitch introduces his new girl friend to Dan and … it turns out to be Marie. The story then unfolds as Dan, Marie, and Mitch try to come to grips with this new reality.
Three things I didn’t like:
1. The Predictability of the Plot – This is usually a big one for me. If I’ve invested 30 minutes in a film and can tell you the direction it is going in, then the screenwriter (who has presumably spent more time with the story than I have) has done a poor job.
2. The Equation of Love and Attraction – Both Dan and his middle daughter (see below) equate these two distinctive realities. Part of the difficulty in adequately portraying love on film is the limits of the medium. Love takes a long time to build and an even longer time to maintain than two hours. I must confess that his criticism could be made of almost every film.
3. The Tidy Ending – The film ends and everyone (everyone!) is appropriately paired off with who they should be. Not hard feelings anywhere in sight. While this might make some people leave the theater happy, it doesn’t confront the messiness of life.
Three things I liked:
1. Steve Carell – I like him in the Office and in the two Almightys. He plays nice and funny well, but I didn’t know if he could play any drama. He does a very good job. Dan loves his family, but doesn’t always like them. Carell portrays well that delicate balance. Part of the emotional satisfaction at the end of the film (as he finds love again) is due to the investment that the film makes in depicting how deep his sense of loss is over his wife. The highest compliment I know is to say that half-way through the film I saw Dan on the screen, not Evan or Michael Scott.
2. The Relationship of the Father to his Daughters – Not many films get this right. In most films the dad is an idiot, or the kids are wise beyond their years…or both. But in this one, there is an entertaining dynamic that doesn’t shy away from the fact that parents and children can love each other desperately and still fight passionately. The most entertaining relationship is between Dan and his middle daughter Cara. Cara has met the boy of her dreams and Dan doesn’t think that she has any idea what love is about and grounds her when he sees her kissing her boyfriend in public.
Cara responds the way preteen and teen girls so often do—with tons and tons of drama. Brittney Robertson plays Cara in a melodramatic, over the top way…exactly the way teens and preteens so often behave. It’s not just that they say “The World is coming to an End!!!” They actually believe it that it is.
3. The Family –DIRL presents family as a mixture of joy and sorrow, best friends and bitter rivals. There is love, there is dysfunction, bad advice, and laughter. The family reunion setting highlights all of the attractions of family. Like other good movies about family (The Royal Tenenbaums comes to mind), it makes the viewer wish we could be a part of that family too.
Overall I recommend the movie. Like the proverbial bumble bee, this movie flies when it shouldn’t. The predictable, sit-com like plot is tiresome, but fortunately the film is not.
Friday, November 02, 2007
A Nice Note
The Dallas Cowboys' team chaplin has died. Matt Mosely has a sweet entry about his testimony here.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Rough Draft
Our school has begun a writing club and I attended the first meeting. It is a student club, and I was the only faculty member there aside from the faculty sponsor. We will meet every month or so and share writing samples. Why am I participating? Mostly because I would like to work on my "skills" as a writer. I would one day like to write a book that people will actually read...Anyway, our assignment for this Sunday's meeting is flash fiction.
Flash fiction (not to be confused with Flash Gordon) is a literary artiface, somewhat similar to a haiku. Except different. What it shares with haiku, I suppose, is that it it places extreme limitations on the writer and forces writing into (hopefully) creative directions. Our assignment was to write a work of fiction in less than 100 words. Here's what I came up with...
Flash fiction (not to be confused with Flash Gordon) is a literary artiface, somewhat similar to a haiku. Except different. What it shares with haiku, I suppose, is that it it places extreme limitations on the writer and forces writing into (hopefully) creative directions. Our assignment was to write a work of fiction in less than 100 words. Here's what I came up with...
Mary looked up from the newspaper. “Jack, what do you know. Do you remember that high school guidance counselor, the one that said little Jimmy wasn’t ‘college material’?”
“Ummm-hmmmm” replied Jack as he carefully poured out the honey on his biscuits. With a satisfied turn of the wrist, he managed both to stop the flow of honey out of the jar and twist the lid back into place at the same time.
“She uhhh…she died. Last night in a car accident she was killed on Buncombe road.”
Jack was silent for a moment. “Well….she wasn’t very good at her job.”
“Ummm-hmmmm” replied Jack as he carefully poured out the honey on his biscuits. With a satisfied turn of the wrist, he managed both to stop the flow of honey out of the jar and twist the lid back into place at the same time.
“She uhhh…she died. Last night in a car accident she was killed on Buncombe road.”
Jack was silent for a moment. “Well….she wasn’t very good at her job.”
That's the best I could come up with in a first draft.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
