My Influences

I have a page at a failed social media site that I almost never check, but it still has a few good things that I am going to be transferring over to this site, which I plan to be much better at editing in the future. Here is the first import - a list of my influences, with a few more additions than was on the original. It may keep getting updated as I go along, but here it is at this point in time:

Influences:
Douglas Adams
Ben Avery
Johann Sebastian Bach
the Bible
John Bunyan
Kurt Busiek
John Byrne's 1980s oevre
Lewis Carroll
Johnny Cash
GK Chesterton
Chris Claremont's X-Men #96 to #200; New Mutants 1-22
classical music
Ray Comfort
classic fairy tales
my family
classic fantasy
Todd Friel
my friends
golden age comics
Ken Ham
Harry Houdini
hymns
Jesus Christ
Jim Kreuger
late 80's to early 90's Christian indie/rap/metal/industrial music
David Letterman
CS Lewis
John MacArthur
Scott McCloud
Megazeen
Alan Moore (not his porn, though...)
old-time radio
Denny O'Neil
The Phantom Tollbooth by Norton Juster
Edgar Allan Poe
Robert Ripley
science fiction
Secret Wars, issue #8, page 23, panel 5
Walt Simonson's run on Thor
The Simpsons (first ten years)
Star Wars (A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back)
Steve Taylor
Terry Scott Taylor (Swirling Eddies, Daniel Amos, Lost Dogs, et al)
JRR Tolkien
Uncle Tom's Cabin
Orson Welles
Charles Williams

Almost all of these come with a caveat, of course. Just because they influenced me doesn't mean that they are all good, and some influenced me in spite of not being very good at all. But that would be a discussion for another time.

That's 'MISTER Mr. Mom' to you, buddy!

Since I've been working from home (or attempting to work from home...sometimes I think of my self as 'self-unemployed'), I've heard the term "Mr. Mom" thrown in my direction more than once. John Hughes wrote the script and Michael Keaton and Teri Garr are the stars in the 80's comedy, and it has some humorous scenes (in fact, it's a wonder that no one has thought to remake it - and why aren't comedies remade as much as, say, dramas or action flicks? And what's the deal with all the parenthetical rhetorical remarks?), but ultimately resolves [SPOILER ALERT!] with Keaton regaining his job and Garr going back home to take care of the kids. True, my wife is now the main wage-earner, and true, I am in charge of the kids during the day (and nights sometimes, if Christa's work is especially harrowing that day), but I initially took offense to the term, until I decided to break down and finally see the movie.

Very traditional values for a Hollywood hit, and, I must say, one that I would prefer for our family (Christa COULD go back to part-time...or work from home...or they could just pay her the money she deserves for running the entire office single-handed), as the stress is compounding at my wife's job!

The problem with being a writer (okay, 'ostensibly being a writer', but that doesn't roll off the tongue as well) is that you kinda need to have something written to get paid, and unfortunately I didn't see the layoff coming soon enough to have something to roll with right out of the gate. And running a week-long Vacation Bible School (I played the part of Paul the Apostle - chained to a desk with writing his only past-time...hmmm, where did I put that chain?) while making sure three kids have a great summer vacation means very little writing time for me in the last few months.

Now it's getting down to crunch time (and hopefully I'm not the one who will be getting crunched!) so, since the kids are close to going back to school, I'll be writing much more often. I should have something to shop around soon, and other piecemeal sidelines should become more prominent in providing a few extra bucks.

So, while I'm nowhere near the basketcase Keaton became during his descent into madness, I can understand the sentiment offered by the well-meaning few who use the Mr. Mom moniker, perhaps not embracing it fully, and use it as an impetus to get back to a sensible family dynamic. I just won't be using it as my 'mom de plume'.

Deconstructing deconstructionism

The problem with looking for Christian elements in modern films (or books, etc.) is trying to look for something that isn't there. Projecting your worldview into a movie (or TV show, book, etc) is dangerous, as we humans are hard-wired to find things that we recognize in what we see. I'm sure someone could find something in porn that might resonate with their worldview. When doing this with the Bible it is called 'eisegesis' and is why some people seemingly get crazy theologies out of Scripture. If anyone ever asked you "what does the verse or chapter mean to you" then you've experienced eisegesis.



In real life it is a major element of postmodernism. Basically it assumes that the author is 'dead' (for the purpose of deciding what the work really means) and throws the responsibility of deciding its meaning onto the viewer/reader/listener. Many artists now produce thematically ambiguous material as a way of tapping into the postmodern mindset and don't care what people get out of it as long as they get something out of it. This is wrong. Things mean what they are supposed to mean (especially the Bible, as defined by Itself), do not mean anything else (even if the viewer/etc. thinks it does), and if they aren't supposed to mean anything specific then they are pretty much meaningless.



Christianity deals with very human issues, like good and evil, repentance for wrongs committed, love and hate, faith, and the merit of performing good works as an outward indication of our faith. These have all been used by thousands upon thousands of pieces of art in various ways, and since they are human issues we as Christians might tend to view them and project our Christian worldview on the piece of art. Many see God and Satan as the dualistic Light/Dark sides of the Force, for example. Spiderman forgives Sandman, so the element of redemption seems relevant to us. But unless they are trying to present actual Christian elements, these are simply the pale reflections of Christianity's better points.



The heart of the Bible is the Gospel, and there has been no movie to date (that I know of, and I've seen so many that I've even forgotten some completely) that accurately conveys the true Gospel (Sin's reality; Repentance of sins; Faith in Jesus; Jesus as the Anointed Messiah, or Christ; Jesus as the only Savior; Jesus as Lord of one's life) outside of the Christian industry (and, sadly, very few within the Christian industry as well...but I'll save that for another diatribe). Without that solid base in place, any other perceived Christian element is lost in the special effects and witty banter.

Fireproooooooooooooooof!

Saw the new movie last night and it was truly well-done, for an independent, shoe-string-budget, non-hollywood, overtly Christian movie. I had some minor quibbles about the pacing and plot elements, but overall it was thoroughly enjoyable AND had a great evangelistic message as well as a pro-marriage, anti-porn overtones. WonderWife also enjoyed it, and she does NOT like Christian movies almost as a rule (although she did like Facing the Giants, which I think was a major factor in her wanting to see Fireproof), although she also had minor quibbles. I think the producers chose wisely when they decided to just make the best movie possible and not try to Hollywoodize it.

Also, it came in at #4 for the weekend, with more than 6.5 Million in box office sales. Not bad, I'd say, but, then again, who am I to say? Even if it got $0, the producers did what they are supposed to do as Christians in this field, and so God will work through it either way. At least now they can make more movies. Just imagine a WELL-DONE Christian comedy, or SF epic, or fantasy, or superhero movie. Anyway, I'm adding Fireproof to my favorite movies.