Narnia

The advertising frenzy in the US over the upcoming release of "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe'' has to be seen to be believed. I grew up on the Narnia books and they form an important part of my emotional furniture (heh!). I think I was 12 the last time I climbed into a wardrobe and hoped for some magic! And as an apologist C.S. Lewis was very influential on my early adult thinking about Christianity. I suspect, though, that many people share my experience of becoming increasingly uncomfortable with and unconvinced by certain aspects of his writing and argument. Most of what he writes about gender is just plain horrible, for example. So I really enjoyed reading this article about C.S. Lewis (courtesy of Greg) which is appreciative but thoughtfully critical. One bizarre element of the whole Christian obsession with C.S. Lewis (which this writer doesn't mention) is that an Anglo-Catholic who had no truck with penal substitution or the infallibility of Scripture and who believed in purgatory should be the darling of the most conservative (highbrow) sections of American evangelicalism!

doughnut update

Regarding my earlier predictions of excess doughnut consumption, I am surprised to report that I went to America for a week and didn't eat a single doughnut! This time I ended up eating enormous amounts of salad. I mean, really enormous amounts. And here's the thing: as someone who avoids salad, I was nevertheless convinced that salad-eaters were superior people. Their skin was shinier, their hair glossier, their personalities more pleasant. I thought that eating salad for a week would make me a better person. Instead, it seems to have had no effect at all. Another myth debunked.

America

Back in Melbourne after a whirlwind week in the States. I had a great time! We spent the first four days at the AAR meeting in Philadelphia, then had a couple of days in the Big Apple. Highlights included:
- David Bebbington (one of the godfathers of evangelical history) coming to my paper and asking me lots of tough questions. Actually, that was mainly scary.
- meeting a scholar who had come to the same conclusions as me about early Methodist culture (but was safely out of my period!) - we had a frenzied half hour of comparing bibliographies - 'read this!', 'read that!'. Very encouraging!
- listening to the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek be entirely outrageous about chickens, belief, necrophilia and Marx.
- a very warm welcome from members of Duke Divinity School faculty
- a profound and moving discussion between Miroslav Volf, Sarah Coakley and Nicholas Wolterstorff about redeeming memories... only the second conference session I've ever been to that has made me weep.
- the book exhibitions... every publisher in Christendom, with 50% conference discounts. I actually hyperventilated! I have brought back a juicy stack of books to read, as well as lots of Christmas presents!
- watching Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (already out in the US) - not that good a movie, actually, but it was fun to be watching it ahead of schedule!
- the American Museum of Natural History. Dinosaur skeletons are so cool!
I'm very grateful for such a stimulating and (in spite of jetlag) refreshing week. Now to get back into routine and actually write something!

Off

Well, we're about to head to the airport. I'll try to post occasionally from the States, but I'm not sure what access I'll have to the internet. Hope your interview goes well, Francie!

changes afoot

'My' university has just unveiled a rather radical plan to adopt the US-style model of tertiary education in which students complete their first degree in a general area and follow it with a two-three year specialist qualification. Most Australian universities follow this model for medical degrees, but otherwise it's pretty unusual. I can see some positives - I think it would mean more students doing history (and other humanities) subjects, and working hard at them because they have a clear goal in mind that requires good grades. That would be great, and would also mean more jobs for postgrads and early career academics in the humanities! But the downside is that most of these specialist courses would only be available to full-fee-paying students. Not great.
I'm reminded of some toilet grafitti I read (stick with me here!) which debated the 'ownership' of universities. One participant in the debate was arguing that students had the right to determine university policy because they 'owned' the unis. The other participant responded that it was the academics who actually owned the universities, because they were doing the really important work. If I had fewer qualms about defacing property, I would have added a third opinion: universities belong to the community. I believe they exist to serve the community of which they are a part, and university policy-makers always need to ask questions about how policies will affect that community. I don't mean by that (obviously) that just because almost everybody I speak to at parties thinks my thesis topic is pointless (OK, maybe I'm just paranoid, but some people have come out and said it!) that I shouldn't be allowed to work on it at community expense. But I do think I have a responsibility to use my learning for the community's benefit, not just as a matter of personal development. And I don't think policies that encourage the university to perpetuate inequality (only people from wealthy families can become doctors/lawyers) are good for the community.
It will be interesting to see how this all pans out...

small things and small minds

As part of our trip to the States, Andrew is doing a work visit to Alabama. He is amusing himself (and me) by coming up with throwaway lines that will (he hopes) ingratiate him with the Southerners he is meeting with. When he has to differ with someone, for example , he plans to say 'Well, call me a rebel, but I disagree with you there' or 'I'm afraid I'll have to secede from you over that'. Oh how we laugh!
Another really, really cool small thing is the iPod shuffle Andrew gave me as an early birthday present. I listened to it on the train this morning, but I'd only saved six songs on to it (all Sufjan Stevens) so the shuffle wasn't as surprising as it could be!

P.S. I do preemtively apologise to any Southerners who have wandered on to this blog by mistake. Feel free to assume I own a crocodile farm and wear an akubra.

gripe

In the blink-and-you-missed-it category, I'd officially place feminism. Yesterday I was flicking through a copy of a women's magazine that a colleague had on her desk (for research purposes, of course!). They had one of those 'what to do/wear/see in your 20s/30s/40s' articles so I dutifully looked up the 30s to see what I was missing out on. Apparently the must-attend party for women in their 30s is the Playboy Mansion. I kid you not.
And if I see the phrase 'girl-power' used in conjunction with the Pussycat Dolls one more time (without the use of the words 'nothing to do with' involved) I may have to become some kind of violent weirdo who assassinates record company executives.

songs, suffering, sympathy

The paper I'm giving in Philadelphia (at the 'Liverpool Hope - Manchester University Seminar on Early Methodism' at the AAR) is called 'The suffering members sympathise': sympathy and its limits in the hymns of Charles Wesley. In this paper I'm looking at the construction of sympathy in the hymns of Charles Wesley, as a way of illuminating the complicated relationship between the culture of early Methodism and the 'culture of sympathy' in eighteenth-century England. If that doesn't make you fall asleep, read on...
Many historians have pointed out that eighteenth-century English culture placed an increasingly high value on sensibility or sympathy (broadly defined as an ability to identify with, and thus respond emotionally to/understand another person's situation). Influential philosophers like Adam Smith argued for sympathy as a natural 'moral sense' that could provide a firm basis for the moral society. Novelists like Samuel Richardson wrote 'sentimental' novels that used heart-wrenching descriptions of the trials of the protagonist to move readers to sympathy. Adapting these techniques, reformers published detailed descriptions of the sufferings of slaves or factory workers or prisoners to move their readers to sympathy and thus, hopefully, action.
The relationship between this 'culture of sympathy' (in itself a far more complex phenomenon than my brief description suggests) and the culture of early Methodism is a vexed question. Evangelicals used the language of sensibility to preach their message and call for reform. Methodism proclaimed itself a 'religion of the heart'. There was an underlying philosophical tension, however, between the idea that people were naturally sympathetic (and thus potentially moral) and the evangelical conviction that people needed rescuing from their natural selves. If treated as a moral guide, sympathy could lead the individual astray. Influential evangelicals like Hannah More attacked sensibility on these grounds.
The hymns of Charles Wesley provide a valuable resource for exploring this complicated relationship. Wesley's hymns were ubiquitous within early Methodist culture, and functioned as a spiritual tool through which emotions were evoked and shaped for spiritual benefit. They are also full of explorations of the meaning and significance of sympathy. I argue that Wesley developed a christological interpretation of sympathy that gave it enormous significance within Christian life and fellowship. The hymns construct the ideal Methodist as one who is profoundly sympathetic to the sufferings of others. I suggest that recognising this construction that may help illuminate the nature of early Methodist relationships, as well as Methodist responsiveness to reform campaigns that relied on the evocation of sympathy.
While sympathy is given great significance in Wesley's hymns, it is also given clear limits, which stem from its christological construction. Human sympathy must never be relied upon to provide those ultimate needs that only God can provide. Sympathy in the hymns may be humanitarian, but it can never be humanist.

The interesting question for me (which I won't address in my paper) is how all this relates to evangelical culture today. The question of sympathy is an underlying theme in many theological debates (the most obvious example is with relation to homosexuality - is sympathy for gay people a danger or a necessary step towards understanding? But also arguments about hell - how could a sympathetic God possibly allow people to be punished forever? And the preaching vs. social justice tussle). Maybe it will come up in the question time!

USA, USA

It's only a week till we go to America! I've become slightly obsessed with the paper that I'll be presenting at the American Academy of Religion conference, and I'm tinkering madly with it. I don't usually fret about presentations, but this one will involve a few too many experts in the field. Apart from worrying about my paper, I'm looking forward to a week of interesting conversations and many doughnuts. Way too many doughnuts.

Serenity

Amidst a way-too-busy weekend (four parties in four days!) we managed to get to the cinema to see Joss Whedon's new movie, Serenity. For those who've missed the fuss (and there hasn't been much in Australia, though check out the fan websites!), Serenity follows on from the TV series Firefly, which lasted less than a season but gathered an obsessive fan base. Andrew and I have been watching Firefly on DVD for the last few weeks... perhaps a little too much Firefly, as I've found myself using Firefly lingo in all sorts of inappropriate contexts. (Goram thesis!)
Serenity is fun in the same way that Firefly is fun. Strong female characters, witty repartee, plot twists galore and lots of really scary baddies. It's a Western set in space, which is a surprisingly good idea! If you get a chance to see it, do.

God on Telly

I'm pleased to say that the installation of a TV card in our computer has not (yet) turned us into screen addicts. There's just not much on, and not much time to watch it! However I am going to make time for John Safran's latest offering, Speaking in Tongues John Safran is a very funny guy, with possibly the most annoying voice on TV, and a genuinely original take on reporting religion. What I loved about his earlier program, John Safran Vs. God, was that he really took religious people seriously. While pointing out how hilarious we are. Unlike most religious reporting, which treats religion as a weird minority interest to be handled with kid gloves, Safran starts from the assumption that most people, in most places, are religious. As he repeatedly points out to his audience, it is the cosmopolitan agnosticism of rich Australians that is unusual. In John Safran Vs. God he therefore plunges into the middle of the most diverse religious communities (fundamentalist Muslims, Mormons, Hindu gurus, Buddhist monks, Christian exorcists, gun-toting rabbis, the Klu Klux Klan) on the assumption that however odd someone's beliefs seem to you, they are probably not that different from you. Which means you can probably have a worthwhile conversation.

Speaking in Tongues sees the return of one of the most memorable characters from J S Vs. G, a Catholic priest named Father Maguire. He's from a parish here in Melbourne, and something of a renegade. In the episode from JS V. G, he has harsh things to say about both Mel Gibson and George Pell. Each week Father Maguire and John will have a chat about the news from a religious perspective. Should be funny (and painful).