by TYLER CLAIR SMITH
I’m writing this three days before the majority of Americans will cast their vote for who should be the next president of the United States. I’m no patriot. I’m of the ilk who unreasonably senses national guilt for old atrocities such as the Native American genocide, the enslavement of Africans, the bloody, arguably unjustified revolution that instigated the birth of this nation and countless other little blights on our people’s history. I will say it again: this is unreasonable. Nevertheless, I find it increasingly difficult to be “proud to be an American,” despite the fact that it might be the greatest, most God-friendly Babylon in the history of the planet. In the end, our government is just another fist shaking at the sky from a lofty tower; it just so happens this one is whitewashed.
So you can imagine my lack of excitement this November. I am rarely appalled by the antics that precede such an election as we have before us. Each go round the talking heads jabber on about how ugly it’s getting, ignoring that four years prior it was just as ugly, albeit with two different men tossing the epithets.
Fact-checking is always fun. I heartily recommend it. If you want to be disillusioned with your candidate, our political process, and our country in general, all you need to do is check up on all those juicy accusations lobbed back and forth between the candidates. What’s even more fascinating is how candidates and their surrogates can get away with telling a lie by wrapping it in the truth. For instance, examine with what ease I can make the following statement:
“On Nov. 4, let’s leave Barack Hussein Obama wondering what happened.”
Did you catch that? Notice how by merely using the candidate’s name, you can strike fear in the hearts of the American people! By combining this with the numerous e-mail forwards, you can create a delicious cocktail of paranoia.
God Bless America!
Now let’s talk about Oliver Stone. Stone just released the sorta-kinda empathetic portrait of our current prez, George W. Bush. W., like all Stone films, can’t really be described as truthful. Yet somehow, it seems Stone became enamored with George Bush the man, if not “the president.” From all reports, W. is not a scathing criticism of someone many would call the worst president in history. Instead, viewers are presented with a portrait of a human being who, against all odds and reason, overcame his obstacles. It’s the story of fathers and sons. It’s a story of power. It sounds a lot like human life. It sounds a lot like truth. But technically it’s not. Technically, it’s a lie. Maybe.
My favorite blogger, Jeffrey Overstreet, recently linked to Roger Ebert’s remembrances of the film The Last Temptation of Christ. In the review, Ebert points out that Temptation’s depiction of Christ is “technically blasphemous.” And yet he insists that by looking at Christ in unorthodox ways, we learn things about him we wouldn’t have otherwise. Perhaps by immersing ourselves in what Ebert claims are untruths about Jesus in The Last Temptation of Christ, we can come closer to a portrait of who the man really was (and, as many would insist, is).
Or how about this? Anyone close to the Christian sub-culture can be a witness to the hoopla that accompanied the book The Shack. Hailed by some, declared heresy by others, the book is the story of a man who meets the Trinity. God the Father? Well, in this book it’s “God the Asian Woman.” By exploring God in so unique a way, are Christians in danger of losing a picture of the true God? Perhaps. Or maybe they are bringing the true image of God into a bit clearer focus through the distortion of good art.
All of this is to say that truth alone is not enough. It’s been said that fiction is telling the truth by telling lies. All great art must distort truth in order to convey Truth properly. Truth is just as dangerous as untruth in the hands of evil men. The artist’s calling is to sift through the darkness and lies of this evil world, revealing the nuggets of light and truth that lurk just beneath the surface.
I don’t think John McCain or Barack Obama can change this country, and they certainly won’t change it through the lies and mishandled truths that have been scattered throughout their campaigns. I do believe, however, in Truth.
And though art is not our redeemer, maybe it can point us in the right direction.
t clair is a senior contributing writer for Into the Hill. He is a minister and cartoonist. Visit his blog at www.iblogdei.com. You can respond to this column by writing him at tclair@intothehill.com.
November 4th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Anyone who declares a fictional illustration heresy has obviously lost touch with, not only the authors intention, but reality itself (this is not to say that you have done this T Clair). It is fiction, not biblical doctrine. Again I say it is fiction, and fiction can say what it wants to say and not be heresy because it does not claim to be doctrine. The book Bruchko (at one time required reading for all incoming Wheaton students) is Bruce Olsen’s true account of his encounters with the Motilone people. The most beautiful moment in the whole book is when he says “Jesus is Motilone.” I agree with him, Jesus is Motilone. I would not at all be surprised if Mr. Young read this book at some point before creating his illustration found in The Shack.
but wait… are you saying that Obama is not a terrorist or a savior? Wait a minute… he is both!
November 7th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
[...] some more of what I think about the election, read the latest Miracle Valley at the [...]