The Burr in the Burgh

St. Paul wrote: "Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy— think about such things (Phil. 4:8)."

Many Christians read this passage and focus on the pure & lovely. But notice that the first word Paul uses is TRUE. Think on the truth. Not every truth is delightful to behold. According to the pure & lovely standard, narrowly understood, one might need to exclude important scriptures such as the beheading of Goliath, the global destruction of the flood, the slaughter of the priests of Baal on Mt. Carmel, or the torture and murder of Jesus. Those are horrifying scenes indeed. I know of people who have been deeply upset to learn of such excessive violence in Holy Scripture. In some cases, their very faith was shaken. The book of Ecclesiastes often takes fire for being, in the eyes of some, a hopeless text. The Gospels are blamed for inciting hatred against the Jews. The epistles of St. Paul have several rather harsh blasts of holy anger. My point is that the Bible itself contains much distasteful content. It is, at times, disturbing, unsettling, and infuriating.

Other important works of literature may not pass the pure & lovely test either, including the plays of Shakespeare (Macbeth, Hamlet, Titus Andronicus), Homer's Odyssey, the novels of Nathaniel Hawthorne, Graham Greene, and John Steinbeck to name only a few.

Some Christians will disagree with me vehemently, but I think the latest cinematic Batman episode, The Dark Knight, written and directed by Chris Nolan, is a work of genius. Yes, it is dark. Yes, parts of it are hard to watch. But it tells the truth, at least part of it. An important part.

I'm no expert on the work of Spanish mystic, St. John of the Cross, but I am familiar with his great work entitled "Dark Night of the Soul." That phrase has come to refer to those times in the life of a person when God seems particularly distant, when the soul is alone with his corruption. That's what this movie is about. The Joker is the archetypal man.

Much of contemporary culture is infused with a deadly optimism about human nature. And this is a demonic lie which blinds people to the depth of their need for someone more than a super-hero, a true white and noble Knight to rescue them.

Mutilation. Disfigurement. Anarchy. Random violence. Betrayal. It's no Frank Capra flick. Chris Nolan did not make a "feel good" picture. But he did make a great movie that tells the important truth of mankind's deep inbred narcissism. Without external restraints, we are worse than savages. Apart from restoration in Christ, all people are disfigurements. Deep beneath the veneer of civility, all human beings are unfunny clowns who appear to thrive on mayhem. At one point, the Joker says, "Madness is like gravity. All people need is a little push."

One extremely useful insight the film conveys is the utter meaninglessness of evil. We don't want to believe that. We constantly want to explain away our bad behavior, to make excuses, to justify ourselves. I steal because I'm poor. I hate because I'm ignorant. I kill because I'm a victim. Ultimately, that is just baloney. We do those things because we are bad. That's all. Sinners sin because they are sinful.

The Joker says, "Do I really look like a man with a plan, Harvey? I don't have a plan. The mob has plans, the cops have plans. You know what I am, Harvey? I'm a dog chasing cars. I wouldn't know what to do if I caught one. I just *do* things."

Alfred, Batman's butler, gets it. He says, "Some men aren't looking for anything logical. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn."

In the dark night of the soul, when God is absent, there is no meaning, no purpose, no direction. Even an evil direction would be more bearable than having none whatsoever. Of course, Chris Nolan's masterpiece knows nothing of the dawn, the Morning Star (Rev. 22:16). But if you can sit through the 2 1/2 hours of "Dark Knight" and not exit craving the sunshine, you are made of cement.

The untimely death of actor Heath Ledger several months ago, makes his performance particularly bitter to watch. What a loss. His Joker strikes me as one of the most amazing on-screen performances I've ever seen. Of course, it goes a bit over-the-top. It has to. Otherwise most of us would scarcely notice. As Flannery O'Connor once said, "you have to make your vision apparant by shock, to the hard of hearing, you must shout. And for the almost blind, you draw large and startling figures."

In my judgment, this is not a movie about Batman. It's about the Joker. Which is to say that it's about me. The Joker is a mirror, a truth-teller of unpretty realities.

I've been doing some research lately on the history and practice of Satanism. I just finished Lure of the Sinister: The Unnatural History of Satanism, in which the author, Gareth Medway, argues that there is no proof of any satanic crimes or ritual abuse/murders, as was the scare in the 60s, 70s and 80s. For the longest time, it was frequently reported that covens were sexually abusing, torturing, and murdering children and adults in Black Masses or other satanic rituals.

You can see evidence of this popular fascination with Satan by the way scary movies changed in the 1970s. In the 30s, horror films dealt mostly with mythical and literary figures. In the 40s and 50s, the struggles with fascism and communism were mirrored in alien invasion pictures. Also in the 50s, a string of atomic mutant films emerged with giant ants, Godzilla, etc. But in the 60s and 70s, the horror themes became much darker. That's when satanic conspiracies were in the backs of peoples' minds, i.e. The Exorcist, Rosemary's Baby, The Omen.

Medway posits that this is a phenomena akin to people who talk about being abducted by aliens: lots of reports and rumors with scant physical evidence.

Certainly, we saw lots of "survivors" of ritual abuse and former high priestesses on Oprah and Sally Jessy Raphael. In the 70s and 80s, a popular evangelical preacher/comedian named Mike Warnke made an impression on me. I had some of his comedy tapes and I thought he was hilarious. But then he would become serious and talk about his years as a satanic high priest as his evangelistic hook. The trouble is that he made it all up. He was exposed as a liar and fake. Medway points out that this is the pattern with most of these scenarios.

Gareth Medway is not unbiased. His inclinations are easily apparent. He reveals upfront that he is a practicing pagan. And it is evident that he believes that followers of dark spiritualities have been persecuted by narrow minded Christians. Indeed, many innocents have had their reputations destroyed by the conspiracy theorists.

I don't know if he's right or not about satanic crimes and ritual abuse. And it is helpful to distinguish between Wiccans, neopagans, Church of Satanists and run-of-the-mill devil worshippers. What is crucial, I believe, is that the Christian Church have a clear understanding of the person and work of Satan. Out of sight, out of mind. But this mustn't be out of our mind. If the sensational stories are mostly bunk, there still is a rebellious spirit who oppresses the earth and all upon it.

I'm thoroughly enjoying Anne Rice's second novel about Jesus, having read and enjoyed the first when it came out. It's called, Christ the Lord: The Road to Cana. Her first novel about Jesus which looked at a portion of his childhood is Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt.

I am one who has also read a couple of her former vampire books, and derived a certain literary enjoyment even from them. She is, without question, a gifted writer.

And I can't imagine the overpowering experience it must have been to pen these books on Jesus' life, especially as they are told in the first person, from the Lord's point of view. I would be terrified to attempt that. And I ordinarily would scoff at anyone who would be bold enough to attempt it.

But my impression is that she pulls it off. The books are reverent without being saccharine or entirely predictable or boring. Her extensive biblical and historical research is evident, but not in the sense of bogging down the story. Rather in the sense of illuminating it. Writing these must have been an act of worship for her. I can see no other way. Only with much prayer and fasting could one do this.

I have not finished The Road to Cana yet, but what I've read so far is very encouraging.

Dr. Gene Vieth posts some new remarks from Rice about her conversion over on his blog. Go here to see.

All I can say is "Wow!" Julie and I watched Across the Universe this evening after a romantic dinner at the Glenbrook Mall food court. It's a terrific film, particularly for music lovers. When was the last time you saw a really good new movie musical? Moulin Rouge? Chicago? Those were good, but this one transcends them.

Hearing all those incredible Beatles songs in these new settings was a really powerful experience for me. I've always liked a lot of their stuff, but tonight I completely fell head-over-heels in love with them all over again. Man, oh man.

Just the other day, Julie and I were listening to some of the tracks from Abbey Road and remarking on how creative was the Fab Four. Every song is completely unique. They sound like absolutely no one else. Poets and musical geniuses really. Most of today's popular music sounds like the same song just replayed over and over again. Blah! Like eating nothing but Saltine crackers for every meal.

Over impressed with their massive talent, I'd almost forgotten how truly sweet and charming so many of their songs are. And humorous too. But the performances in Universe with the art, the style, the dance, the design, the 1001 inside jokes and references, and the story moved me. Bravo!

Heath Ledger's most critically acclaimed performance was for the recent Brokeback Mountain, a film I did not happen to see. But I could tell from several earlier performances such as The Patriot and Monster's Ball that this was a young artist of considerable promise. It is with some sadness then that I write of his strange and sudden death.

My further comments can be read at the Seminary Blog.

St. Louis songstress, Erin Bode, was a huge hit at the banquet this evening at the Grand Wayne Center here in Fort Wayne. Every year, Concordia Theological Seminary hosts its annual Exegetical and Confessional Symposia. This year the topic was on the Atonement. And every year, the Thursday night of Symposia week is the night of the banquet. Traditionally, attendees were treated to speakers, intros, jokes, etc. This year, to the relief and delight of some and most likely the chagrin of others, the faculty roasts and inside jokes were put aside and the packed banquet hall was filled with the sounds of jazz music. Bode was quite the hit receiving a lengthy standing ovation at the end. Go here to read information about her inspiring work with the Themba school in South Africa.

Do you ever wish you had your own personal cheerleader?

Check out the latest post at Concordia TheoBLOGical Seminary.

Author of study guide for ‘The Golden Compass'

By Rosa Salter Rodriguez

The Journal Gazette

Janelle Sou Roberts | The Journal Gazette

Scott Stiegemeyer, a Lutheran pastor, says “Compass” author Philip Pullman “clearly does have an anti-church agenda.”

Leave it to the Rev. Scott Stiegemeyer not to stray too far from the front lines of the culture wars.

A pastor in the Lutheran Church’s Missouri Synod who now serves as admissions director of Concordia Theological Seminary in Fort Wayne, Stiegemeyer has a longtime interest in the intersection of faith and popular culture.

So, it didn’t surprise him when an editor at the synod publishing house called him three weeks in advance of the release of the controversial movie version of Philip Pullman’s “The Golden Compass” and asked him to write a study guide for use in churches.

“He was a reader of my blog,” says Stiegemeyer, who uses current events and cultural topics to gather readers to his “Concordia TheoBLOGical Seminary.”

But, while some are calling on Christians to boycott the movie because of its allegedly anti-Christian themes and Pullman’s militant atheism, Stiegemeyer’s guide doesn’t.

Instead, it lays out some of the issues and provides biblical and doctrinal context for approaching the work in a question-and-answer/discussion format.

Should Christians read/see works by unbelievers? Who is Philip Pullman and what does he believe? Should I, as a Christian, see the movie?

Formerly a pastor at Concordia Lutheran Church in Pittsburgh, where he started his first blog, “The Burr in the Burgh,” Stiegemeyer has credentials that include presentations on C.S. Lewis’ “The Chronicles of Narnia” and “The DaVinci Code.”

For about two years, he and another Lutheran pastor, Don Matzat, turned an otherwise dead Sunday night radio time slot into two hours of lively chat on a call-in show, “Let’s Talk About Jesus.” The two took on topics such as the then-popular apocalyptic “Left Behind” book series.

“Questions and Answers about Philip Pullman’s ‘The Golden Compass’ ” is available free at www.cph.org/compass.

Why would you as a pastor even get involved in this area of popular culture?

“It seemed to me that congregation members, especially those of the younger generation, are getting more and more of their information from entertainment media even more than from the hour they’re in church on Sunday morning. Popular culture is influencing people’s faith. So as a pastor, I felt called to help them sort the good from the bad, and interpret what they are hearing and seeing from the perspective of their faith.”

What piqued your interest with this movie?

“Well, I had read the novels several years ago, and what piqued my interest about them then is they’re fantasy genre, and with fantasy genre novels, they often have spiritual themes. And Pullman has been outspoken about wanting to be the anti-C.S. Lewis (known for his Christian orientation). I think (Pullman) may be a bit tongue in cheek about that, but he despises C.S. Lewis. So that intrigued me. And a lot of (the commentary) was sort of predictably reactionary and emotional. … ‘Knee-jerk’ is a good word. So I wanted to balance that out.”

For those of us who might have been living under rocks, what’s the fuss about with this movie?

“This is the first part of a trilogy called ‘His Dark Materials.’ Its (theme) is not at all subtle. The characters find the church and God are evil, and they go on a crusade to kill God, whom they call The Authority. It’s set in an alternative universe, but very similar to the one we know. The characters do travel between universes. But it’s very complex, as fantasy novels are. ‘The Golden Compass’ is the most toned down, and the movie, if anything, softens the potentially objectionable material.”

So what happens in “The Golden Compass?”

“The bad thing that happens is that children are being taken, and what you eventually find out is that it is the church that is taking them and torturing them. The church is conducting experiments on them and basically sapping their souls. The heroine and her companions go on this rescue crusade.”

Not a pretty picture.

“No. It’s not a pretty picture. (Pullman) clearly does have an anti-church agenda.”

Which I’d guess you think isn’t accurate?

“In his view, the church is oppressive of free thought and free expression. I think it’s unquestionably true that at times in its history it has been oppressive, by burning books, and, occasionally, people. I’m not defending the flaws. But even from a secularist point of view, the church has done a lot of good.”

So you think Pullman is going to the extreme?

“In his church, there are no good people. There’s no ambiguity there. There’s nothing redeeming. And there’s nothing appealing about the religious characters. I think it’s not only not true, but it also hurts his storytelling, because the art of a good storyteller is to have characters that are multifaceted.”

Do you think his portrayal of God is Christian?

“ He portrays the church and God as being purely about law and rules. His favorite term for God is ‘The Authority,’ which leaves out a lot of things, like mercy and kindness, compassion and love, which are essential features of the God I believe in. He never really talks about Jesus and what he represents. If the church taught what he says, I’d be against it.”

Do you think the movie or the book is appropriate for the audience at which it’s aimed, which is young teens?

“It is targeted to the 12-to-14 age group. That’s a very difficult age. Young people are starting to define themselves. If you have someone who is uncertain in their beliefs, this could have an influence. And there is some merit to the argument that it is an entrée to the other books, but I think that is a weak argument. Do I think it’s appropriate? I wouldn’t ban it. But I don’t think I would just hand it out. I think discussion in a book club or church group is certainly a good way to approach it.”

So, if I’m a parent of someone in that age group, what do I do?

“I am a parent of someone in that age group! (Stiegemeyer and his wife, Julie, a children’s book author, have a son, Jacob, 12.) We went and saw the movie together. I didn’t block him from the book, but he doesn’t show any real interest in it. He was interested (in the movie), but I would have given the movie only a fair grade because it was confusing, and it wasn’t that well crafted as a film. His one response about the movie was that it was confusing. He liked the action scenes and special effects, the computer animation.”

What about parents who say they don’t want, as Christians, to expose themselves or their kids to these ideas?

“Some parents will say, ‘I want to avoid it,’ and I don’t blame them for that; I can respect that. But as a parent, I think we have the responsibility to equip ourselves to answer the challenges it raises, not avoid them. I’m not one of those Christians who want to shield themselves from the surrounding culture.”

So, you’re saying to parents “Don’t overreact”?

“I don’t think it’s a major threat to faith. People will want to forbid it, but I think that will have the opposite effect. If a kid wants to read it, he’ll read it, or if he wants to see the movie, he’ll find a way. I’d rather he do it in front of me than reading it or seeing it and hiding it from me. That way we could have a conversation about it. I just don’t want to make a law about it. I don’t want to be what Pullman says we are, which is lawgivers to exclusion of everything else.”

In America today, there really are two distinct holidays celebrated on and around December 25th. Both celebrations are called "Christmas." One is a cultural celebration while the other is religious. These are not necessarily mutually exclusive although it seems common for people to observe one and not the other.

See the seminary blog for my post "Keep the Mass in Christmas."

Eastern Promises is the latest film directed by David Cronenberg and stars Viggo Mortensen, Naomi Watts, and Armin Mueller-Stahl.

Cronenberg has a bizarre repertoire of films with a flair for the grotesque. Not only are his movies often graphically violent, but they serve as veritable meditations on the effects of violence, both emotionally and bodily. And in that sense, I hate to say, I think he may have a spark of genius.

Personally, I do not have a high opinion of most of his work. His most recent two films, Eastern Promises and A History of Violence, however, do deserve a bit of attention. It would surprise me very much, in fact, if Eastern Promises does not earn an Oscar nomination for Best Picture.

Director Cronenberg began his career making low-budget horror films specializing in yuck. E.P. is not a horror film by strict definitions, but is very similar thematically. And there is no shortage of yuck. Two fundamental themes for the horror genre are transformation and identity. Many literary forms ask the question "who am I?" but horror asks "what am I?" and "what am I becoming?", with typically unhappy answers.

The definition of a monster is a being who should not exist but does, or a being that cannot be classified. For instance, Frankenstein's monster is a being who should not exist but does. He is the fabrication of a scientist who plays God and attempts to manufacture new life out of old body parts. And Darth Vader is also a monster because we don't know what he is. He's hard to classify. Is he man or machine?

So horror asks, "what is it?" Dead or alive? Man or machine? Male or female? Plant or animal? Earthly or extraterrestrial? Sane or insane? Healthy or sick? Clean or unlcean? Think of the horror monsters you've seen and you'll find that these are the questions most often at play. The significant thing is that they urge us to ponder what it means to be a human. When does a being cross the line of being non-human to human or vice-versa? Etc. With today's bio-ethical dilemmas and the advances of research in genetics, artificial intelligence, robotics, cloning, chimeras, etc., you will see more and more, I predict, horror stories asking such questions.

How does Eastern Promises fit into this horror scheme? It's not a horror film, per se, but it considers transformation. A History of Violence does so even better, I'd say. Transformation from one thing into another, usually as the result of violence or bodily disfigurement. In E.P., Viggo Mortensen does a truly brilliant job portraying the ultimate thug as part of the Russia mafia in London. He captures the accent, look and mannerisms masterfully.

Here is what I value in this film. It assumes and teaches that violence changes human character. Not being the object of violence, but the subject. My pastor, Rev. David Petersen, posed a fascinating question in Bible class last Sunday, a question that he found in the work of Peter Kreeft, I believe. Suppose your child were a prisoner is a Nazi concentration camp. Now suppose, your child were approached by the sadist Dr. Josef Mengele who proposes to spare your son or daughter if he or she will assist him in his experiments. So the choice is this: Assist Mengele in torturing others or be tortured by him. Now how would you want your child to choose?

Many would say that since they don't want their child to be harmed, they'd prefer him to assist the doctor. But what is truly more damaging, to be tortured or to torture. I agree with Pastor Petersen's point that to do violence to another person damages the doer in more deep and lasting ways.

In his own way, I think Cronenberg makes this point. The monsters in this world are not those who've been damaged externally but those who do the damaging. They became spiritual freaks, if you will, disfigured on the inside.

That is the headline from Reuters earlier this week. Calling for a boycott of the recent film based on the controversial trilogy, His Dark Materials, by Philip Pullman, the Vatican statement elaborates: "when man tries to eliminate God from his horizon, everything is reduced, made sad, cold and inhumane". Also according to Reuters, the Vatican paper called The Golden Compass, "the most anti-Christmas film possible."

The Golden Compass is indeed a reason for concern, primarily because of the subsequent two volumes of the trilogy it is associated with. The current movie version of Compass is only mediocre as a movie and for the most part, avoids the most sticky wicky points.

How should Christians respond? First, I agree with the Vatican's concerns, but I believe it is important to remain cool-headed. Is it truly the most anti-Christmas film possible? Such exaggerated assertions suggest that the reviewer either didn't really see the film or is prone to overreaction. In both cases, our cause is harmed.

One of the biggest flaws in Pullman's technique is his extremism. Even some people who agree with his views feel he is an impediment because he overstates his case. I hope the church does not fall into the same approach. Not every attack on the Faith requires the same degree of response. Otherwise, every attack will be the most anti-Christmas film possible. And if every attack is the most anti-Christmas film possible (to use the phrase from the Vatican), then none of them are. Not everything can be the "most possible." Do you see?

So if next year, another film is produced that undermines Christianity but does so in a more direct and sophisticated way, how will we respond if we've already labeled Compass as the worst possible? If it's the worst, then all others must not be as bad.

I am in no way defending the militant atheism of Philip Pullman. I am only saying that our responses to our critics ought to be in proportion to the quality of the threat.

Hi folks,

I just posted a few comments on the Pullman movie over at my department's new blog which you can see right here.

It's a dud, folks. I went to see it today and it's just not that good of a movie. Aside from Pullman's atheistic agenda, this movie is mostly a bore. Seemingly, not many folks are rushing out to see it. Check this out. It only made about 9 million bucks on opening night. The latest Harry Potter flick made over 100 million on it's first night.

I love this reviewer's take. It's hilarious.

... about one thing. And that is that stories teach. They, in fact, often teach more effectively than any other method I could name.

Here is what the controversial author of The Golden Compass (vol. 1 of His Dark Materials) had to say when accepting an award for it in 1996: All stories teach, whether the storyteller intends them to or not. They teach the world we create. They teach the morality we live by. They teach it much more effectively than moral precepts and instructions.


As the great philosopher Arthur Fonzarelli said many a time: "Exactamundo!"

Too bad Pullman didn't take his own statement to heart. Stories teach. Tolkien knew it. Lewis knew it. Dostoevsky knew it. John Milton knew it. Those were excellent writers. It is usually a sign of an amateur writer when the didactic elements overpower the narrative elements. And I have seldom read published works as tediously preachy as His Dark Materials. He makes the mistake of many well-intentioned Christians who appear to write stories but are really just thinking up premises as a pretext for writing an evangelistic tract. I am a Christian and even I find it objectionable to be tricked by an author into thinking I was going to be getting a story instead of a sermon. Don't get me wrong. I like sermons. It's just that I like stories too. Not only is Pullman's teaching objectionable, but he ruins the story.

There are tons of helpful resources out there. But if you are looking for one more, give this one a try. I wrote it for Concordia Publishing House and the price is right. FREE.

If you read it, I'd be very interested to hear your comments.

Aren't polar bears the awesomest, by the way?!

If you haven't figured out the significance of the whole internet social networking phenomenon, here's an article from TIME mag that will help.

Why Facebook Is the Future - TIME

Many of you have seen the spectacular preview for the upcoming movie, The Golden Compass, which is based upon the novel by Philip Pullman of the same name.

The Golden Compass is the first volume of the well-known and rightfully controversial His Dark Materials Trilogy. I've read the books and expect the movies to be fabulously popular. The trouble is that Pullman is the reverse image of C.S. Lewis. While the author of The Chronicles of Narnia wrote in order to express Christian doctrine in the form of a gripping mythology, Pullman want to unravel Christian faith. If you've read the books, you know what I mean. The question, of course, is whether the films will delete the most egregiously anti-Christian elements in order to be marketable.

According to an article in Entertainment Weekly, religious groups are calling for a boycott. Writer Missy Schwartz cites the fact that The Da Vinci Code made over $200 million at the box office in the midst of a boycott as evidence that such things don't hurt Hollywood in the wallet, where it counts. The Last Temptation of Christ episode would seem to prove otherwise. Admittedly, that was twenty years ago.

One of my goals for 2007 was to re-read the Pullman trilogy and prepare some response material. Alas, I have not met that particular goal. Does anyone know of any substantial, book-length response to Pullman?

Check out Pandora Radio. I'd tried it out once before but quickly forgot all about it.

It's commercial free internet radio where you get to customize the playlist.

Don't let the title of this amazing documentary film confuse you. This is not a movie about prostitution. It is a movie about real children. Amazing children.

Originally planning to reveal the plight of women in Calcutta, India, documentarian Zana Briski found herself unexpectedly charmed by the children of prostitutes who were literally Born into Brothels. And you will be charmed as well.

Briski felt moved to try to help some of these children any way she could. So she began to teach a number of them about photography. The film reveals its heart when she gives the children point-and-shoot cameras of their own. The images they capture are heartbreaking, both in beauty and in sorrow. And I defy you not to become enamored with the children themselves.

The movie made me feel a variety of emotions. Anger at myself for being a complainer when God has given me so much. Sadness that there is such poverty and despair in the world. Delight in the sweetness of these kids. I felt hope as I saw people rise out of selfishness to help others less blessed. And hope for the future of children who appear destined for misery. Finally it made me want to do something for others. I was changed a little bit by the experience of watching Born into Brothels and that is the definition of great art.

See this movie.



---

Can horror films serve a useful purpose? Jeffrey Overstreet thinks so. And I agree. Oh most horror films are probably, at best, merely entertainments for adrenaline junkies. Rather, most of them are harmful gore-fests that desensitize the viewer to human suffering and feed a broken sadistic appetite to see people cut apart, mangled and eaten.

But there are a few movies within the horror genre which exceed these limits and make a truly beneficial impact on the viewer. Of all genres, Horror is the most difficult to define. That's because it is really the only genre that refers to an emotion instead of a setting or scenario. So there can be horror dramas, horror comedies, horror westerns, horror space operas, horror romances, horror fantasies, etc. Any story that horrifies you is a horror story.

Is it always bad to be scared? Or is fear a useful and even good thing, from time to time? If experiencing artwork reminds you of the curse of death we all share, or if it makes you understand that the devil is real and hell exists, or if it stirs you up from moral relativism to acknowledge the fact that some things are evil and some are good, then that artwork has helped you in a spiritual sense.

And the only way to reach some people is to shock them. Flannery O'Connor said that for the hard of hearing you must occasionally shout. For the morally deaf and blind, a bit of excess in our expression is necessary. Wasn't Jesus going for shock value when he told people they had to chop off their hands and gouge out their eyeballs to avoid going to hell?? That's a pretty creepy image if you ask me.

Overstreet, in his book, Through a Screen Darkly, recalls an anti-smoking billboard he used to pass regularly that showed a photograph of a gross blackened lung filled with cancer. He found it repulsive. Was that an effective way to dissuade people from smoking? I bet it was.