Outside Books - "Where do you people get this stuff?"
Fandom Apocrypha
naomichana
[info]naomichana
Add to Memories
Tell a Friend
"Where do you people get this stuff?"
I had an eloquent, well-researched, and long post about Joan of Arcadia finished last night. Then LJ ate it. Let me try to summarize: I like most of the characters on JoA. I like Joan's family, I get a kick out of her friends, I am relieved to note that her teachers are not universally evil, and the cop subplots are... um... well, moving on, I think it's uneven but has a lot of good potential. I enjoy reading fannish love about the show on my friendslist. There's only one tiny little problem standing in the way of my enjoyment.

I can't stand God. (On the show, that is.)

Let's take Joan's God at His/Her/Their word -- namely, that we are seeing a manifestation of the same God who turned up in the Tanakh, the New Testament, and the Qur'an. We know, then, that this God is manipulative, mysterious, periodically incomprehensible, frequently overcontrolling, occasionally mistaken, and, yes, snippy. (I view the post-Golden-Calf conversation Moses has with God in Exodus as classic black comedy. "I shall destroy the Israelites!" "Uh, God, you had this covenant with Abraham...." "Screw the covenant! I'll grind their bones to make my bread!" "All the other gods will point and laugh, you know." "Oh. Good point. Okay, just tell the Levites to slay their way through the camp, I'll send a quick plague, and we'll call it a day.")

This God is not, however, ordinary. This God is the opposite of mundane (the word I'm looking for is actually "holy"). But Joan's God is so mundane S/He makes my teeth hurt. Joan's God only appears in non-threatening guises, only asks Joan to do safe and age-appropriate things, refuses to answer questions (leaving well enough alone isn't really a talent of the God I've read about), doesn't perform miracles for reasons that wouldn't pass muster with a bright six-year-old, won't offer proof of identity ditto, refuses to talk about sin, keeps mum about any afterlife, is entirely apolitical (especially ironic given the saint being referenced here), and has yet to do anything that a demon couldn't do according to mainstream Christian theology. In short, God is dumbed down to the point of being a below-average human with some seriously irritating tics. This God wouldn't know the mysterium tremendum et fascinans if it walked up and stuck its tongue down His/Her throat.

Even worse, this God says things like "fulfill your nature" with a straight face. Now, I suspect that JoA's God is supposed to be sort of like the God in Julian of Norwich's theology, a God who brought the world into being and sustains it out of pure and focused and unceasing love. Unfortunately, Julian of Norwich's God also spent the last several millennia suffering horribly and dying for what Julian never quite comes out and says is universal salvation. Julian's God is way interesting, and that's before S/He goes all gender-bendy on us. JoA's God, as far as I can tell, must've spent the last several millennia -- existing out of time, naturally -- watching Dr. Phil. Bleah.

I am also disappointed in Joan; I wish God had appeared to Joan's Mom, who seems less inclined to let God slide by with mealy-mouthed piety. Me, I'd have a list of questions ready, and I'd keep asking them. After all, JoA's God keeps flaunting His/Her omniscience -- although I notice S/He's been smart enough not to claim omnibenevolence.

"God, where does evil come from?"
"God, when You said You were 'friendly' in the New Testament and the Qur'an, were You speaking in tongues?"
"God, would You like to offer some proof that You created that tree, and was it out of nothing or preexisting matter?"
"God, if You're everywhere, are You in the toilet?"
"God, I appreciate the attention and all, but couldn't You 'catalyze' a lot more effectively if You went to have a chat about birth control with the Pope?"
"God, when You say 'have I ever made anybody burst into flames?', I think You're forgetting the entire population of Sodom and Gomorrah, Nadab and Abihu, several hundred Israelites at Taberah... hang on, did You also want me to count the people You told other people to set on fire?"

There is a good reason they don't make shows about (and perhaps for) people like me. But I do wish I could like Joan of Arcadia, and I keep getting hung up on how completely un-God-like God is. Shoot. Where do they get this stuff?

Current Mood: discontent

Comments
kita0610 From: [info]kita0610 Date: October 27th, 2003 04:35 pm (UTC) (Link)
You know, I don't think I can come up with anything scarier than a politically correct god.

Hold on a mo...nope. Nothing.

It'd be like spending eternity with hippies.
jennyo From: [info]jennyo Date: October 27th, 2003 04:57 pm (UTC) (Link)
*cries*

You realize this is my definition of Hell. Well, actually Hell is one long meeting, where the Mormons, the Hippies, and the Academics take turns boring me and I don't even have a notebook. And we're talking about semantics.

Eternity with hippies.
naomichana From: [info]naomichana Date: October 27th, 2003 05:23 pm (UTC) (Link)
I can buy God as something of a hippie -- with mind-altering substances and insane-making optimism. (I mean, Ezekiel's God? He'd fit in perfectly at a Dead concert in more ways than one.)

I cannot buy God as a post-hippie Boomer wallowing alternately in political correctness and nostalgia.
penwiper26 From: [info]penwiper26 Date: October 27th, 2003 04:54 pm (UTC) (Link)
LOL!

I watched my first episode of JoA Friday -- well, if by "watched" we mean "played at the computer with the TV on in the background and finally figured out what show this was about five minutes before the credits". It was amusing, but I can certainly see where your objections to God would come in.

And re: Julian -- I always get the feeling that she would preach universal salvation if she didn't feel herself graciously bound to uphold Mother Church. She's extremely interesting, and (I've found) far too rich to devour in one sitting. And she seems to be just an example of this sort of fully-creative-but-also-very-syncretic impulse in her time period. I swear I'd be a medievalist if I hadn't taken too many classes on the Romantics: "Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human," my ass.

Oh, did I say that out loud?

Gotta watch that.
naomichana From: [info]naomichana Date: October 27th, 2003 05:33 pm (UTC) (Link)
Julian is definitely a theologian who rewards multiple readings. Honestly, I'd argue that she is preaching universal salvation (verging on apokatastasis), just doing so very carefully. What on earth does she mean by "all will be well" otherwise? To say nothing of the broader implications of the necessity of sin. (And it's not insignificant that almost every time she trots out the wellness line, she follows it up with a statement of submission to Holy Mother Church. Uh-huh.)

Anyway, yeah, Shakespeare has gorgeous language, but if you're going to try and tell me he has new ideas you'll have to pull the other one, and you should feel free to become a medievalist in your copious spare time. ;)
loligo From: [info]loligo Date: October 28th, 2003 07:21 am (UTC) (Link)
Honestly, I'd argue that she is preaching universal salvation (verging on apokatastasis), just doing so very carefully

Totally. I read Julian on my own and I went into it knowing nothing about her other than the hazelnut metaphor -- she rocked my world so completely when she got to the part about "well, the Holy Church teaches us that all these different sorts of people are going to be eternally damned, and that doesn't exactly seem like all things being well, does it?" and God tells her that he has a plan, something that she cannot comprehend, a deed that will take place at the end of time, that really will make all things well. I mean, I would have liked it better if God had said, "The Church is full of crap," but I don't think Julian would have been ready to hear that, anyway. So "Believe the Church for now, but know that there is something more to the story," makes a pretty good compromise.
loligo From: [info]loligo Date: October 27th, 2003 04:56 pm (UTC) (Link)
Let's take Joan's God at His/Her/Their word -- namely, that we are seeing a manifestation of the same God who turned up in the Tanakh, the New Testament, and the Qur'an.

Really? Did God actually say that?? (I missed the first two episodes.) Well, that's another thing I would have complained about in my Joan post of last week. Why, WHY are the show's writers creating these kinds of problems for themselves? Hey, I'm totally on-board with God being multi-faceted, and only a few of those facets being captured in any particular faith document. But if your show is going to go around directly contradicting the facets presented in particular documents, why would you draw attention to those, let alone explicitly claim continuity?

Even worse, this God says things like "fulfill your nature" with a straight face.

To be fair, some of God's pronouncements that sound kind of bland and New Agey on the surface are actually perfectly respectable Buddhist philosophy -- I remember their conversation over the chessboard was pretty good in that regard.

I am also disappointed in Joan; I wish God had appeared to Joan's Mom, who seems less inclined to let God slide by with mealy-mouthed piety.

I think it's a not-unrealistic bit of characterization, though. Joan hasn't had a very difficult life, she's not very intellectual, and she's sixteen -- I can definitely see her being more focused on the personal annoyances God creates in her life, than on the big issues.

Two comments that have appeared in recent posts in my journal have helped me pin down what bugs me about this show. One was [info]coffeeandink saying that suspending disbelief in a story about God is just like suspending disbelief in a story about fairies. The other was Maggie, in the discussion of suffering in genre fic vs. litfic, saying that she finds fantasy solutions to real problems to be hurtful, not comforting and escapist. So, I guess for me, regardless of whether I believe in the literal existence of a God (a question I will probably never answer), religion and the issues dealt with in religion are so real and so problematic, that I can't stand to see them treated as fodder for cheerfully shallow storytelling. I think that if this were a show about Joan listening to fairies, I wouldn't be having this reaction.
danceswithcats From: [info]danceswithcats Date: October 27th, 2003 08:11 pm (UTC) (Link)

Dull is safe

Well, if he/she actually did anything really interesting, it might offend someone, and we can't have that. This is network TV we're talking about. They like to claim they're being edgy and groundbreaking, but when it really comes down to it -- not so much.
vonnie_k From: [info]vonnie_k Date: October 27th, 2003 09:28 pm (UTC) (Link)
I actually like that Joan is a regular teenager with the usual teenage preoccupations and a healthy dose of apathy, instead of a possessor of precocious theological curiosities (although she is far from dumb.) In the first or second episode, she did bring this up--why the visitations were wasted on her instead of someone like her brother Luke, with enough intellectual prowess to engage in such debates. I don't think God gave her a satisfactory answer to that question.

I do agree that God appears mundane & often coyly vague in that irritating therapy-speaks way, but as my enjoyment of the show is largely derived from its earthly interactions, i.e. the relationships among the Girardi family members as well as the connection Joan makes with her friends (which I think are deftly handled for the most part), this doesn't bother me much. Basically, I think of God as a giant plot device, occasionally irritating but mostly benign and sometimes even snarkily fun. I can see how this could be frustrating for someone who might have been looking for a meatier discussion on the theological aspect though.
ide_cyan From: [info]ide_cyan Date: October 28th, 2003 02:07 am (UTC) (Link)
Watch The Second Coming!

This version of The Second Coming. The one written by Russell T. Davies.

Erm... it might be a little difficult to find (unless you buy the Region 2 DVD, which is available from Amazon.co.uk; I saw the series on Showcase a while ago myself), but it's worth it.

It has miracles, evil, tough questions, political points, and a heroine who is a lot more like Joan's mom than like Joan in JoA. You might not agree with the ending, but I'm sure you'll like the rest of the story. :-)
From: (Anonymous) Date: November 3rd, 2003 07:48 pm (UTC) (Link)

It's just a device

This is what folks who try to take JOA seriously on a theological level don't get. The execproducer has a central controlling concept: Call it circles in the pond, dominoes, what have you. Little things impact event in unknown ways. "God" is simply a device to make this happen. It is not "God" in any recognizable religious sense, only in the broadest, pop-philosophical sense.

11 hands defiled or Defile your hands
Protocanonical Literature
she praised god for the creation of the heights
Name: she praised god for the creation of the heights
Website: Baraita
Pseudepigrapha
"Outside books" is the literal translation of a Hebrew phrase used in Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1 to describe those religious writings which fall outside the accepted canon of divinely inspired scripture -- i.e., apocryphal literature.

In Mishnah Yadaim, however, apocryphal books are instead described as those which "do not defile the hands." This contrasted them with sacred texts, which were considered to be ritually impure in the second degree (probably in order to discourage anyone from touching them casually or storing them together with food).

I use this LJ to comment on various aspects of media fandom, especially those concerning the extension or subversion of TV, movie, or book "canon." I'm sure you all get the idea by now.

(And, yes, it would have been simpler to just say, "This is the journal of a confirmed humanities geek" and leave it at that, but this way is more fun.)
page summary
tags