This Canada Day weekend Andrea and I are continuing our journey through the new Battlestar Galactica series. This evening we finished season two. What's interesting for me as I watch is to observe a common theme that spans other movies and TV shows beyond BG. I'm talking about commentary on the "human condition", about the exploration of what it means to be human.
I enjoy sci-fi a lot. Andrea and I have a running joke about which sci-fi character gets the most "space action" (I think Gias Baltar is winning. Then again Tiel'c from SG1 enjoyed his share of the ladies...). Part of what I enjoy about sci-fi is the exploration from an outside perspective of humanity's condition. What I noticed this evening however is that in most cases that discussion is woefully one-sided. Guess one can't rely on hollywood for an intelligent discussion.
Maybe it is the sex that bothers me; though not so much as an appropriate plot mechanism as it is when used poorly in the discussion. Same goes for violence. It seems to me that most TV shows or movies that explore the issue of what it means to be human present characters that are overly sensual, impulsive, self-centered, immature and lack self-control. These characters are presented to us with commentary like, "perhaps that makes you the most human of us all" after that character committed some morally questionable act. We've all seen it a thousand times.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the world would gravitate toward "sin" and call it human. I'm not denying human sin, I'm saying that the arguments presented to us in the media seem to tell us that to be human is to live for one's self, walk the ethical tightrope and behave however we like when it suits our purpose, or worse, that it's violence, pain or the pleasures of eros that define humanity: a message that flies completely in the face of scripture - of who God says we are. As the only people who are likely to read this will understand what I'm talking about, I'll spare you the discussion. But something else occurred to me this evening...
I wonder if there isn't a bit of faulty logic happening here. Sherlock Homles certainly wasn't without his logical failures ("...the exception disproves the rule.") and it seems to me that the writers and thinkers of TV shows like BG might be making a major logical error.
It falls under the category of another foolish saying, "you are what you eat." (sorry, but scripture disagrees. It would say, "you eat what you are" - for out of the heart the mouth speaks...) in that it seems as though the writers decide that because sensuality, violence, [insert bad quality here] characterize a large portion of the human experience that that is what the human experience is about. It's like saying, "apples are almost always red when they're not green, therefore red or green is the essence of what makes apple apple." (that is, Steve Jobs jokes aside). It's the fallacy of taking a characteristic of something and using it to define that something. Normal people call it "generalizing" or "painting with broad strokes". It's the equivalent of me saying, "Humans sin. Therefore, sin is human." when in fact [from a scriptural perspective at least], nothing could be further from the truth.
Anyway, I'm over explaining things again. Maybe I'm just reacting to the implication that my desire to be holy, upright, honorable, full of wisdom and integrity, self-controlled, etc. is contrary to the core of what makes me human. That seeking after these things and denying myself is to deny that which makes me human, when in fact scripture paints the portrait that we are never so human as we are when we follow Christ and live holy lives.
.:. Sven .:.
0 comments:
Post a Comment