Here’s an interesting bit of philosophical inquiry from philosopher Ed Feser on David Cronenberg’s version of “The Fly”, one of the most disgusting sci fi movies ever made. I am familiar with the original, but (knowing Cronenberg’s reputation for yuck) I’ve opted to avoid the remake. Feser is not dealing with the yuck factor. Rather, he’s dealing with the metaphysical question of what it means to be a human being and how far changes in our bodily structure can go before you stop being human and start being Something Else. It’s a question science fiction raises for us a lot—and a question the sciences will soon be confronting us with as we continue to screw around with life at its most fundamental level, just because we’ve got the funding. We are already champing at the bit to treat fertilized eggs and embryos as a scientific playground for endless experimentation. And, as the headlines blared recently, we are beginning to fiddle about with synthetic genomes, just to see what we can do. It doesn’t take much imagination to see some giant multinational corporation taking it upon itself to create human chimaeras which mix human and animal DNA in all sorts of ways (in fact, it’s already been done a bit, but there’s lots of room for more monstrous things to be done).
Science fiction is the literature of If. It’s best practitioners tend to ask theological questions: What does it mean to be human? What’s it all about? Where do we come from? Where are we going? It’s funny that so much of the genre is so bent on basically theological issues while so many of its authors are atheists. I suspect this has to do with Augustine’s remark that God has made us for himself, and our hearts are restless till they rest in him. Again and again, science fiction takes away Christ with the right hand and gives him back with the left. Film critic Jeffrey Overstreet calls this phenomenon “the inescapability of the gospel” and argues that, because God is the primal storyteller and the gospel is the primal story, it is inevitable that we human makers of tales will imprint the pattern of the universe on our best tales, even if we are not believers and even if we are not conscious of it.
So, for instance, 2001: A Space Odyssey, directed by the atheist Stanley Kubrick and co-written by him with the atheist Arthur C. Clarke, puts us in a godless evolutionary universe and then supplies mysterious godlike aliens who help our race become divinized and, quite literally, born again. Steven Spielberg was quite surprised when somebody pointed out to him that the story of a peaceful being who descends from heaven, befriends children, has the power to heal and give life, dies, rises from the dead, and ascends into heaven was done before E.T. Similarly, in The Matrix we see the central character, Thomas Anderson (“Twin Other Son”) revealed to be Neo, the New Man, as he is heralded by a John the Baptist figure, betrayed by a Judas figure, killed by a Satanic figure and brought to life again by the kiss of a character named “Trinity”. After this, he destroys the powers of Hell from within and then, once again, ascends into heaven.
Some people might be tempted to call these movies “Christian”. I wouldn’t. Rather, as Flannery O’Connor once described the South, I would call them “Christ-haunted”. They retain the shape of the hole where Christ should be. They are, as all great pagan art is, evidence of a search, not evidence of having found the Christ for which we search. They search for Christ because we can’t not search for him, our hearts being made for him. They move us because he is our greatest desire. But they are ultimately only shadows, not the reality.
Comments
Post a Comment
Very interesting reflection - However I am not sure that teh ditinction between ‘Christ haunted’ and Christian is merited. The Kawolski brothers (creators of the Matrix) openly acknowledge the Christian influences behind the first Matrix film…. even the christological timeline that runs through it. Granted there are elements of Buddhism, and Kung Fu - with a touch of Philip-K-Dick Paranoia. But it is the fact that Thomas (the doubter) Anderson (Son of Man) - provides such a redeeming climax and then comissions his disciples before ascending into heaven, that makes it much more than merely Christ haunted. It is an excellen tool for a bit of post-modern Christologial catechesis!
Great article. Although I wouldn’t call Kubrick an atheist, he was more of a pagan. He seems to have expressed the idea of the possibility of the existence of the supernatural. This attitude is, of course, far superior to that of the atheist (“I somehow know for sure that the supernatural does not exist. And those who disagree with me are Untermenschen”). And this attitude fits perfectly with your point : not being an atheist, he wasn’t struggling to create a coherent Universe without God, which is impossible. He was constructing a Universe where the True God was not visible (since Kubrick did not know him) but with some kind of sense infused in it by the One who was, for Kubrick, the Unknown God (the one who had a temple in Athens that Paul talks about).
One must reflect on the simple definition of theology: Theology provide an orderly documented account ,it is a science concerned with things in themselves, and it’s task is to define and interrelate basic concepts with one another systematically. Biblical Theology - Old Testament is the study of religion of the relation of the spirit to God,and that it might exists with no external tokens of God’s favor. The old Testament is a religion , without ever becoming theology. new Testament - influence of the Greek mind on Christianity ,therefore becomes theology. Biblical expositions on the Characteristics of Scripture: The Standard of Truth ( Isaiah 8: 20) , ( Mat 15:1-3) , ( Mark 7: 7-9, Mark 7 : 13) , ( John 5: 46-47) , ( Acts 18: 28), ( Collosian 2:8)
Science fiction as theology never! According to read on . Please reflect on Pope John Paul encyclical letter on Faith and Reason ( Fides et Ratio , Sept 14 1998) a d on the restoring Christian philosophy , Pope Leo xIII, (Aeterni Patris 1879)
peace to all !
Hollywood’s Sci-fi genre is based on a gnostic gospel. That is why the same themes reappear over and over again in these movies. And since gnosticism is a distorted version of Christianity it is easy to be tricked into thinking that there is an underlying Christian theme. This promotes the New Age type of “spirituality” which leads so many Christians away from the Church. In my opinion this is a very deliberate attack on the Church. It creates doubt, which is the enemy of faith. This is a very sophisticated propaganda technique because it works below the conscious level. If you want to see an example of how this works in the case of Iron Man 2, go here: http://publicvigil.blogspot.com/2010/05/iron-man-as-prometheus-unbound-preview.html.
You bring up the issue of transhumanism, even though you don’t use that word. Transhumanism is closely related to eugenics. It is the same idea of creating a super-race, but using modern technology rather than simple breeding. The word “transhumanism” itself was created by Julian Huxley who was an advocate of eugenics. (His grandfather T.H. Huxley created the word “agnostic”. His brother Aldous wrote “Brave New World” and was an evangelist for psychedelic drugs like LSD.) There is definitely a link between IVF and transhumanism. Catholics have a chance for once to get ahead of this movement instead of waiting to react like in the case of artificial contraception. Pope Benedict XVI has already spoken out on this issue in Caritas in Veritate: “Technology is highly attractive because it draws us out of our physical limitations and broadens our horizon. But human freedom is authentic only when it responds to the fascination of technology with decisions that are the fruit of moral responsibility. Hence the pressing need for formation in an ethically responsible use of technology.” Read more here: http://publicvigil.blogspot.com/2010/04/transhuman-temptation.html
You mention Arthur C. Clarke the writer of 2001. I’ve been intrigued by him for some time. I’ve come to realize that he very deliberately used science fiction as a way to promote secular humanism. I also think he wanted to stimulate scientifically talented young people to develop the technologies that he thought were important for his vision of the future. That vision is one that rejects man as created by God, and seeks to create instead a race of Nietzsche’s supermen. This is the same basic philosophy that guided Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger. It is a racist, eugenic and atheistic philosophy that grows out of Malthusianism and Darwinism. It was nurtured by groups like the Fabian Society. It has been steadily combating Christianity until today we are living in a predominantly secular humanist society. As Catholics, we can proudly point to the fact that the main enemy of secular humanism has always been the Catholic Church. (Here is a revealing interview with Arthur C. Clarke where he speaks openly of his disdain for religion: http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/clarke_19_2.html )
Good stories follow the pattern of the biblical story: Paradise, Fall, Redemption, Restoration. We like stories that follow this pattern, whether we see it or not. It’s burnt into our DNA.
Growing up, my frieds’s mom recalled Kubrick from her high school in the Bronx, she was friends with him growing up. Stanley was well known in the neighborhood and basically spent every day after school at the movie houses of the Bronx watching every movie that came out. The dude knew everything about the art and techique of story telling on the screen.
Clarke was a master of science and technology of the late 2oth century. He actually figured out the possibility for using geosynchronous satellites for telecom in 1945 (the orbital distance is called the Clarke Orbit).
Did he beleive in magical explations for nature? No, but why would he?
It seems like you are falling into the trap of the “new story” is a re-conceiving of the old story. Here we go with the Mithras, Attis, Horus Krisna and Buddha similarities. They are about to be posted now that you brought it up. Not to mention Gilgamesh and all the flood stories, and Sargon, Minos and all the lawgiver stories. Here they come, those dang atheists and agnostics.
I have long said that the original Twilight Zone series has enormous theological and catechetical value. Good stuff! I like this concept of the inescapability of the Gospel.
Thanks for making me aware of the blog post, and for connecting the dots between theology and science fiction. For a further and regular exploration of this and related topics your readers might be interested in my blog TheoFantastique.com.
If you’re at all leery of Cronenberg’s yuck factor, “The Fly” might be one to avoid, but that would also be a shame because Jeff Goldblum’s performance as a man slowly losing, but struggling to maintain, his humanity is haunting and moving and in a category by itself.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.