Content of books

[shondrea]

Aw, come on guys, do we have to be fighting? Make love, not war!

Emerald, although I agree with Ras, i can see your points. We do need to be careful what we expose ourselves to. I know that I would not have some of the temptations I do if I had avoided certain books growing up. I wish I had been more spiritually aware as a teen, because now I have some problems due to the material I read.

I do think, though, that as Catholic adults we have an advantage. We know how to read or watch things, even imperfect things, and be able to take the good and leave the bad. We can eat a delicious rib dinner, and be able to leave all the grisle on the plate.

What one person can handle with no problem, may be another person’s sin, or temptation. For example, take for instance a comic series I enjoy. 2 supporting characters are in what appears to be a homosexual relationship (though as the story goes on, it shows that it’s not love, more of a power control, obsession and Stolkholm syndrome. it’s actually very sad) This story doesn’t tempt me to sin, because it isn’t sexual in the least, and doesn’t arouse me, only stirs saddness and pity for the poor, confused boy. But a guy who’s struggleing with SSA? Shouldn’t read it, most likely, as it might be an occasion of sin for him.

 

[Rascalking]

No can do. I know for a fact that if no one complains, CEOs at media companies think that it’s OK. Case in point, a music video by a certain female singer got a lot of complaints. The sponsor dropped it. Of course, a few anti-censorship groups got up in arms but their complaints didn’t change anything. It’s happened in similar situations.

I’m still not quite sure what Jackson Pollack was up to but that’s another discussion.

God bless,
Ed

Well than my friend, complain away. I don’t really disagree with you, by the way. I just mentioned to a friend on here recently how much I feel like a prude because of the rubbish out there. But instead of complaining and being sour all the time (No, I’m not accusing you of that at all) I like to embrace the beauty that’s around me and try to record it somehow-the best I can. I’ve noticed that people who complain alot (once again, I’m not accusing of that…I need to repeat myself because I don’t want to be misunderstood) are simply, well-unpleasent to be around, usually don’t have many friends, and are quite sad and miserable.

As for the Jackson Pollack comment-let’s just agree to disagree on his genius and beauty!!!

 

[edwest2]

I don’t think adult Catholics have any advantage. If they were gradually led to believe that this or that book, TV show or movie was OK without examining it in the light of Christian principles then I think a lot of stuff needs to be thrown out. I threw out my first nonfiction book a few years ago. The author decided to add a lot of sexual content that was not relevant to theme by the way. It ruined what little relevant content was in there.

It’s not just a matter of personal taste either.

Hope this helps,
Ed

 

[shondrea]

I’ve noticed that artists take this topic in a completey different direction than other people. I think it’s because we can see the most horrible, saddening, grotesque thing, and see beyond it. I can see a scene of assisted suicide, and instead of being turned off by how I disagree with it, I see instead the emotions of the people involved. I see how much emotional and physical pain they must be in. I feel the pain of their family memebers, of their loved ones. I may not agree with what’s going on on screen, but as an artist, it isn’t about the ACT, it’s about the EMOTION. it’s about the feeling, the drive. WHY did that person kill? What eotional needs does killing sate? How lonely does one have to be to get that way?

I don’t see the homosexual, I see the confused and lonely young man who thinks he loves the man who tried to kill him. I don’t see the suicide, I see the damaged past that lead to it, and the pain it left. I don’t see a porn addict, I see a woman who doesn’t know what she’s doing is wrong, who can’t stop after she does, and her struggles

When i read about sin, I don’t see sin. I see the people, and how it effects them.

 

[edwest2]

Well than my friend, complain away. I don’t really disagree with you, by the way. I just mentioned to a friend on here recently how much I feel like a prude because of the rubbish out there. But instead of complaining and being sour all the time (No, I’m not accusing you of that at all) I like to embrace the beauty that’s around me and try to record it somehow-the best I can. I’ve noticed that people who complain alot (once again, I’m not accusing of that…I need to repeat myself because I don’t want to be misunderstood) are simply, well-unpleasent to be around, usually don’t have many friends, and are quite sad and miserable.

As for the Jackson Pollack comment-let’s just agree to disagree on his genius and beauty!!!

What’s wrong with being a prude? I never understood that. In the late 1960s, all I heard about was that the Europeans were somehow ahead of us Americans. I later found out what that meant.

I own quite a few books with great art, however, abstract art never really appealed to me although I was exposed to a significant amount during my studies at college.

No, I don’t like complaining but I do work in the media and I’ve watched it get farther and farther away from standards that I believe in, and it’s become cruder, more vulgar and more graphic. Not a trend that I can buy into. When I pick up some contemporary Arts magazines, my usual thought is: Is this all they can depict?

I see what the media champions today as great art. I can’t support it and I feel the need to tell my fellow Catholics why.

God bless,
Ed

 

[revert_jen]

I’ve noticed that artists take this topic in a completey different direction than other people. I think it’s because we can see the most horrible, saddening, grotesque thing, and see beyond it. I can see a scene of assisted suicide, and instead of being turned off by how I disagree with it, I see instead the emotions of the people involved. I see how much emotional and physical pain they must be in. I feel the pain of their family memebers, of their loved ones. I may not agree with what’s going on on screen, but as an artist, it isn’t about the ACT, it’s about the EMOTION. it’s about the feeling, the drive. WHY did that person kill? What eotional needs does killing sate? How lonely does one have to be to get that way?

That’s all very well, and probably for you it is OK. But while it is admirable to love the sinner (although not actually important in this case, since it is a fictional character not a real person), you aren’t let off the hook for hating the sin. If for example your empathy with the fictional person committing assisted suicide causes you to vote in favor of allowing assisted suicide for real people, then the work of art has caused you to sin and should have been avoided.

Also, frankly, emotion is a good servant but a terrible master. For one thing, the emotions portrayed by the writer (of the book, or the screenplay, or the play, or whatever) aren’t real. They may or may not even be what the writer considers to be real. Possibly they represent what the writer considers people should be like. With great writers, it is probably very close to real, but there are a lot of people out there who are more concerned with using art to forward their agenda than for using it to portray truth. There are even more who have formed their consciences so poorly that they believe their agenda, although generally against the Natural Law, is truth. They work on the emotions of the audience in the hope of moving its members closer closer to the writers’ own position. Frequently this technique is used in cases where an intellectual argument on the subject is unsustainable. Sometimes it’s just that an intellectual argument is more difficult than just swaying people’s emotions.

I understand that you are saying you are interested in the emotions of the characters, rather than the effect on your own emotions. But that just leaves you watching people who make their decisions based primarily on emotion, which in itself makes this way of decision-making (which is lacking the virtue of prudence) seem more commonplace. It may even make it more likely that you will do the same at some point in the future. I’m not saying it will do this, just that it may. So I am not saying that you shouldn’t watch the moving account of assisted suicide (or whatever) but that you should keep in mind what the artists may be trying to do, and thus guard yourself against it. And even if the artists have no agenda, it won’t hurt anything to look for it and not find it.

And if you don’t want to work that hard sometimes, e.g. if you just want to veg out in front of the TV for a little while, you are best advised to select something that has less challenging and/or problematic content.

Now people (not you, Shondrea, since you have been kind to everyone which is certainly more than I have managed!) can set up straw men around my position on the matter if they like, saying that I’m suggesting people should never watch anything with difficult content, or that nobody should ever let any emotion influence a decision, or that anyone who watches or reads about a sin is going to run out and commit it. However, the Truth in its beauty contains vital shades and nuances, and my position is like Truth in that, if in nothing else.

–Jen

 

[shondrea]

I can completely agree with what you are saying Jen. There have been times where, in the past, certain series have changed my opinions on something. I’m much more aware of such nuances now, I’m happy to say, and I completely understand how we need to be vigilant of how our views and opinions are being affected by what we view and read.

See, secret is, I don’t watch tv, hardly. A couple episodes of Jeopardy a week, maybe a good History channel doc (though now it’s all about the end of the world ) but mostly, I’m a reader or a DVD watcher. And even that’s not often. The reason I defend fiction, even problematic fiction, is beause I myself am a writer. 90% of my entertainment time is spent writing, or making up stories, so…I don’t need to worry about the artist having an alterior agenda, trying to persuade me of something agains tmy morals…because I’m pretty sure I don’t have a split personality

When I DO get into a new series, a new book, movie or anime, It’s generally, for a while, the only thing I’m watching or reading, in terms of entertainment and not religious work. My current favorite show, I’ve seen about 5 times. This gives me much tie to be able to analyze the work, to see it’s flaws, strengths, to REALLY ponder the questions it’s asking. One of my favorites has several themes, one of which is, how far do you go in war to save the oppressed? They’re being killed, urdered, just for being alive. They have no rights, freedom, no peace. How far do you go to save them? In the eyes of the morally questionable protagonist, few things are going “too far”. He truly, truly desires to save these people, to help them live, to give them a chance, and many times his methids are just and fair, but many times, they aren’t, and BOY is he called out on that fact, often.

Had I watched this series once, I probably would have agreed with his methods the whole way through. But seeing it many times has allowed me to see that I simply CAN’T agree with some of this methods, because they are too hypocritically evil, even within the context of a just war. Over the course of the story, he sees how his methods are hurting people, even as he saves people, and how they’re hurting himself. I wouldn’t have caught that subtle line the first tie through. I guess you could say I overanalyze characters and stories I really like! Some people pity me for that, saying it must make me unable to enjoy thee show, but it doesn’t! It makes me enjoy it MORE, picking apart the characters heads, motivations, ideals, finding out the WHY behind the WHAT, and now, i know, has the added bonus of letting me see a LOT deeper into the moral side of the story.

I didn’t mean to come across as thinking I watch only with emotion. Really, it’s part emotion, part psychology. I’m a psych nut (no pun intended!) And I love seeing what makes people tick.

As an artist, I know very well how one can use their craft to help shape public opinions. I think my realization of how many artists think and work gives me a little insight into how and when a film or book may be getting manipulative, and makes it easier to be able to look past it.

Please don’t get me wrong- I’m not saying read anything! We should temper what we read, watch and write. I know I have! Before coming home, my stories were provocative, sexual and sometimes downright dirty. Sure, there was good, wholesome plot, but it wasn’t all that. And now? Now that I’m home, my writings have changed. I don’t write about saints, or morality battles, but I’ve definately changed many things. Where scenes were once sexual, now they’re romantic. And I tread lightly over delicate areas. One of my stories involves a boy who was molested by his brother as a child, and now as an adult is truggleing to overcome it, and learn to forgive his brother. Although my story has allusions to sexual abuse, I never detailed it. I also never painted the older brother to be a monster, despite his terrible deeds, because he himself was sick and hurt as well.

…Dang it, I had a point when I started this reply, and now I’m just wandering aimlessly :crying:

 

[edwest2]

Look at World War Two. Great filmmakers produced movies that made the enemy more evil than was known at the time, or to create an atmosphere of patriotism. Propaganda leaflets were created by artists and writers and dropped on enemy countries. Even cartoonists produced propaganda to create fear or tension or mistrust

When dictators come to power, who gets arrested? Artists and intellectuals. Why? Because the people tend to trust what they write and depict.

God bless,
Ed

 

[revert_jen]

One of my favorites has several themes, one of which is, how far do you go in war to save the oppressed? They’re being killed, urdered, just for being alive. They have no rights, freedom, no peace. How far do you go to save them? In the eyes of the morally questionable protagonist, few things are going “too far”.

Great post!

This part reminded me–you know, I was talking to a good (non-Catholic) Christian friend the other day (good firiend, and also she practices her faith, well, faithfully). She was talking about some difficulties she was having with someone who was doing some things with good intentions, but the actions were wrong. I spouted out what I thought were two ways of saying the same well-known truism: “The end doesn’t justify the means” and “You may not do evil that good may come.” I was really shocked to find she hadn’t ever heard them before. They were just things I had heard from an early age. when I was young, I didn’t always believe them, but I always knew them. I thought everyone knew them. Anyway, it sounds like the character you’re talking about doesn’t know them either.

I guess you could say I overanalyze characters and stories I really like! Some people pity me for that, saying it must make me unable to enjoy thee show, but it doesn’t!

People who don’t do the analysis can hardly be said to have watched the thing at all. When it comes right down to it, if it’s art, you need to analyze it to appreciate it properly, and if it isn’t art, there’s no excuse for the questionable content, which then becomes either smut or propaganda.

As an artist, I know very well how one can use their craft to help shape public opinions. I think my realization of how many artists think and work gives me a little insight into how and when a film or book may be getting manipulative, and makes it easier to be able to look past it.

I agree. You’re lucky to have that extra insight. I was a writer for a while too, but writing computer manuals does NOT have the same effect. :banghead:

…Dang it, I had a point when I started this reply, and now I’m just wandering aimlessly :crying:

Points are over-rated.

Thanks for a great post!

–Jen

 

[shondrea]

I hadn’t heard it either until about a year ago. I use to be the kind who thought it was ok to do a bad deed if the outcome was worthy. There are still some extreme cases where I think I could tolerate the lesser of two evils, but they’re rare and hypothetical.

Seriously! I’m a member on a large anime forum, and have spent hundreds of pages with friend dissecting our favorite series in great detail. The characters motives, morals, intentions. The historical and Biblical references and allusions. The emotional instability of the characters after so much stress, the art style…and other members can’t understand how we can go on for so long about one series. And the simple matter is, that’s how you can tell a series is good, and has depth and merit beyond mindless entertainment. It makes you THINK, it makes you learn, it makes you think in ways you never thought, appreciate new things.

If I can’t find anything worth discussing, it probably wasn’t worth watching in the first place.

Heh, well…computers are the devil, so those could be true horror stories!

 

[edwest2]

Speaking as a writer, I just want to tell people that you have to have standards, good standards, by which you determine what is right and what is wrong, appropriate and inappropriate.

I have been looking at a few recent comic book type works and I’ve noticed that the standard is not well thought out. It appears to be a reflection of what the current media is putting out as opposed to something more positive and uplifting. The darkness and the dysfunctional seem to be common themes today. And by the darkness, I mean embracing the darkness where it is no longer evil. Creative people need to be careful.

God bless,
Ed

 

[3DOCTORS]

As a reading addict of quite eclectic tastes, and just a person who gets obsessed with all kinds of things at various times, I found myself recently attracted to the Bride Quartet by Nora Roberts, because I studied cake decorating last fall and am single and even though I wouldn’t have a big wedding myself, sometimes the creative person/little girl inside me just likes to look at stuff like bridal magazines for harmless fun.

I have just finished reading the first in the series, Vision in White. When I’d flipped through the book at the store, I missed the fact that it had sex scenes, and being ignorant of Roberts’ oeuvre, knowing only that she was quite popular, I was almost blindsided. I could tell by the conversations between the characters that it might be PG-13, say, but then it started to be R.

So . . . what I did was, I just flipped pages till safely past the “too much information” scenes. I was thus able to enjoy the light reading of the fluffy chick-lit plot for what it was.

However, I was disappointed in the overall tone, which was that sex before marriage is the norm, great sex indicates the potential for true love, etc.:banghead: All of which I am going to start my own thread about because I will stray off topic otherwise. I’ll use the phrase Chick Lit in the title for anyone who’s interested.