god is not elsewhere / some conversation about movies, art, politics and spirituality with gareth higgins

Entries categorized as ‘Sexuality’

81 Films of the Decade

December 3, 2009 · 2 Comments

ai

In the year 2000 I was 25 and single, finishing up a Ph.D., stressed out of my tree, working with a small NGO on peace and non-violence issues, trying figure out what it was that I wanted to be when I grew up.

Now as 2010 approaches, I’m a month away from being 35 and married, I haven’t published the Ph.D., but am less stressed, working as a writer and doing some other things, and trying to figure out what it is that I want to be when I grow up.  The consolations of life this past decade have been the same all along – the richness of friendships old and new, the life-force that is sparked when I look at natural beauty – of mountains or oceanscapes or my lover’s face, the enlightenment or delight that is present when I read a well-calibrated sentence or hear astonishing music, turning over to go to sleep, and the feeling of potential that I still hope for every time the lights go down when I’m at the movies.

This has been a tough decade for many of the people that I presume read this blog – we’ve been confronted by the unintended side-effects of globalization, and taught to see life as a way to be daily afraid; we’ve experienced an economic tightening that came as a shock; we’ve all been angered by this politician or that; some of us have even lost a great deal in the wars that are still being fought.  At the same time, of course, some of us have seen peace come to places no one ever believed were ripe for such change.

(more…)

Categories: Cinema · Economics · Non-violence · Psychology · Sexuality · Something Else Entirely · Spirituality

Antichrist, John Cusack, the End of the World and the Re-birth of Art

November 23, 2009 · Leave a Comment

Over at The Film Talk we’ve just posted our next podcast episode in which we discuss three films that I think are hugely important – ‘Antichrist’, ‘Gaia’, and ‘2012′.  If you’re interested in the end of the world and how to stop it; the politics of nation-building; the difference between provocation and mental illness; and in hearing about a film so good it’s close to miraculous, check it out here.

Categories: Cinema · Non-violence · Psychology · Sexuality · Spirituality

‘For the Bible Tells Me So’: Belfast on Monday Night

November 13, 2009 · Leave a Comment

for the bible tells me so movie poster

For anyone in Belfast next week:

My friends in Changing Attitude Ireland are hosting a screening and discussion of ‘For the Bible Tells Me So’, a compelling, informative and moving documentary about the experience of Christian families responding when a family member comes out.  I think this film is important because it does such a good job of showing human faces that otherwise are too often made abstract; and it makes a serious attempt at addressing some of the theological questions that are often ignored in attempts at challenging homophobia.

The showing of this movie in Belfast is organized by Changing Attitude Ireland, on  Mon 16th November at 7.30pm at the Studio Cinema, Donegall St. Visit Changing Attitude Ireland’s website for more details.

Categories: Cinema · Sexuality · Spirituality

‘New’ Irish Cinema – The Paradox of ‘Turning Green’

November 5, 2009 · 1 Comment

turning green poster

You know, we like to be friendly round here, but if you’ve been in the neighbourhood for any length of time, you’ll also know that I often grieve the lack of imagination in most films.  Robots kill some people/people kill more robots; abs-ridden guy meets cute girl/conflict/unification; bloke changes, you know the deal.  So it’s a pleasant surprise to see ‘Turning Green’, your none-too-typical American boy grows up in a small West of Ireland village/competes with the local gangster by selling porn magazines (illegal in the eyes of the State and shameful in the eyes of the Church)/and makes witty comments about what’s wrong with the land of my birth while Timothy Hutton, an actor I like a great deal, snarls at him from under a pork pie hat.

(more…)

Categories: Cinema · Psychology · Sexuality · Spirituality

‘Forget it, Roman?’ Polanski and the Politics of What We Remember

September 30, 2009 · 25 Comments

A friend suggested I should comment regarding Roman Polanski’s arrest and the attempt to extradite him to the US to face charges stemming from his admitted sex offence against a 13 year old girl in 1977.  I’m reluctant to do so, because the issues are complex and probably better handled in conversation where dialogue partners might arrive at a truth together, so I’d like to invite such a conversation in the comments below.

ADDS at 10.50am, October 1st 2009: After a day of reading and attempting to respond to people’s comments on this and other blogs, I’m further persuaded of the challenges indicated above.  I’m grateful for the conversation, but eager to emphasise that I don’t have any answers here – I am trying to raise some questions that I think need to be discussed.  So, despite the fact that nothing in the original version of this post should have been understood to imply otherwise, let me state explicitly for the record: It is self-evident that Roman Polanski did a terrible thing, which was not merely a breach of the law, but morally wrong, and had the potential to be profoundly damaging to the victim/survivor.  I think the legal proceedings against him should be carried through to their conclusion; he should be held accountable under the law.  But I don’t believe that this means that the issue can then be considered resolved and forgotten about.  My original post below indicates some of the other issues that I think need to be discussed in this case.  I am neither an expert on these matters nor do I have a monopoly on understanding them.  I am simply hoping to encourage a wider discussion in the hope that such a discussion will reduce the potential for such awful abuse to happen in the future.

ADDS at 6.35pm, October 2nd:  Just read a helpful summary refutation of the arguments against Polanski’s extradition.  I differ from the tone of some of the article, and still don’t think that equating the concepts of moral justice, the restoration of a victim/survivor, and accountability with the potential for real rehabilitation for the perpetrator with the application of one country’s particular legal system is good enough, but I found much of this article compelling.  Let me reiterate: I think that the legal process should take its course for Polanski, and accountable justice should be served: I have never stated otherwise.  But as I said before, my earlier post was not an attempt at addressing the case comprehensively – how could it be?  It was actually an attempt at talking about other issues surrounding the case; it has been suggested that this was insensitive of me, and if that is so, I apologise.  Talking about the issues in a meaningful way is not easy for anyone; and so I hope that we can continue the conversation in the same spirit of sensitivity to victims and survivors, mutual respect for other commenters and generosity toward each other that I was trying (and clearly not entirely succeeding) to advocate in the post.

Now, to my original post:

It seems to me that BOTH the extremes of ‘lynch mob’ politics and the ‘oh he’s an artist and European so it doesn’t really matter’ tendency are missing part of the story.  Some of the calls for Polanski’s punishment dabble in self-righteousness; but the attempts to mitigate his behaviour are ridiculous (witness the utterly absurd article published in ‘The Huffington Post’ that called for a boycott of Swiss chocolate, and asserted that his actions didn’t matter because the age of consent in California was 14 then, and is probably 13 now [this is not true, by the way]).

One hopes that the fresh interest in the story can allow space for serious discussion about the issues at the heart of the case, and not just whether or not one man should or should not be punished for his particular crime.  Some of these issues, I believe, include the following:

(more…)

Categories: Cinema · Sexuality

The Movie of the Year 2009

September 28, 2009 · 4 Comments

Earlier in the summer I began an ill-advised attempt at writing haiku over at The Film Talk (what’s the verb for composing a haiku?  Haikuing?  Haiku-tecturing? Haiku-grammising?) in response to some of the films that have intrigued me this year.  The experiment was abruptly ended by an outbreak of good taste, but as we roll into the fourth quarter of 2009, in anticipation of the awards season ‘quality’ epidemic that’s sure to colonise our screens over the next few months, I thought I’d return to reflecting on how intriguing a year this has been at the movies.

As the last three months of the year traditionally see the release of Oscar-bait, our vision of the best films of 2009 will inevitably be somewhat skewed toward films that haven’t been released yet.  I’ve mentioned before that Roger Ebert may have made the most sensible suggestion for renewing the Academy Awards in a fashion that would both help films released earlier in the year not to be forgotten, and allow audiences to expect decent movies from January to September.  In that spirit, let’s have a thought experiment: I’m going to attempt having two ‘best lists’ for this year; starting with this last week of the month, I’m going to post my treatment for the film of the year – a quixotic notional endeavour, in which the bits that made me feel happiest to be a film lover are cut together in a genre-bending masterpiece that exists only in my head, because that’s the only place it can exist – you will have your own choices, and I’d love to hear about them here on the site – so please share your own imaginings in the comments section.

We’ll break it down into sections – today I’ve written about the premises that I enjoyed the most; I’ll post again on Wednesday with thoughts on the best intros and moments; Friday will see the best endings and even closing credit sequences (trust me, there are a few) that I’ve seen.

And I promise to return to all of this when the year is done; some of these films will be forgotten in year-end lists, and part of the reason I’m writing this as a reminder to myself. Please forgive the indulgence if you’re not interested; but if you are, I’d love to have a conversation in the comments, starting today with your thoughts on the best premises and/or opening sequences you’ve seen this year.

(more…)

Categories: Cinema · Non-violence · Sexuality · Spirituality

What We Talk About When We Talk About Sex

September 8, 2009 · 2 Comments

My friend Will Crawley has a story about a BBC investigation into pornography profits; his particular angle is the role that the Christian Brothers Investment Services, one of the biggest investors of official ‘Catholic money’ in the world, plays in bolstering the porn industry.  Apparently the guidelines for investment are easily made flexible – and so the CBIS apparently has a hefty wad of cash wrapped up in the production of money shots.

According to Will: “A spokesperson for CBIS told the BBC Hardcore Profits programme that they aim to influence the moral direction of companies in which they have investments. He also suggested that their policy is a common sense response to the world we live in: any Catholic who believes its right to completely withdraw from any company making any profits from pornography would have to switch off their internet supply, avoid most of the world’s hotels, and stop watching television.”

The spokesman makes a reasonable point; but the world of ‘ethical’ investing is always subject to this kind of parsing.  Will once reminded me that there’s only one answer to the ‘Well, where would you draw the line?’ when it’s posed as a means to doing nothing, a kind of ‘Via Apathy’.  The answer, of course, is ‘SOMEWHERE’.  Nothing is done perfectly; but it must be done.

More after the fold

(more…)

Categories: Economics · Sexuality · Spirituality

Woodstock: ‘The biggest hassle is dealing with politics’

September 1, 2009 · Leave a Comment

123069woodstock

In preparation for the release of Ang Lee’s ‘Taking Woodstock’, which Jett and I discuss on Episode 86,  I watched Michael Wadleigh’s director’s cut of the original documentary (a gorgeous, filled-to-the-brim Blu-Ray) – a telling experience, given that it’s so full of the evocation of an era gone by that we’re all supposed to want to live in.  Some immediate reactions followed by a question or two:

The film really takes its time to get ready; the split screens give a sense of the fantastic madness of the endeavour, what immense planning has gone into it, and how enormous the scope of the event was when it actually happened.

‘There has to be some way of stopping the influx of humanity’ – Bill Graham’s considered opinion of how to keep the show business-friendly.

‘It’s about what’s happening now’ – the succinct thoughts of someone who typically says ‘man’ at the end (and/or beginning) of every sentence.

‘I want to know why the fascist pigs have been seeding the clouds’ – concertgoer disappointed that the CIA or somesuch have made it rain.

‘Helen Savage please call your father at the Motel Glory in Woodridge’ – either an indication of just how community-oriented this festival was, or proof to conspiracy theorists that coded messages were being sent from the stage to J Edgar Hoover.

‘The brown acid is not specifically too good’ – a lovely understated piece of pharmaceutical advice.

When the concert finally starts, the most obvious thing is how enormous Richie Havens’ hands are; he’s not precious about asking for guitar mikes to be turned up; it’s clear that nobody cared about professionalism or needing to show i.d. or, by the mid-point, making money.  It was about communication; people unshackling themselves; taking the risk of looking stupid because social norms have made them afraid to smile at strangers.  Or at least that’s what I want to hope it was about.

James Parker in The Atlantic recently called this the last time we were able to police ourselves; there was only a brief window before the festival gave birth to its evil twin, Altamont, infamous for being the site of the killing of Meredith Hunter during a Rolling Stones concert.  Parker tells us that Woodstock itself was not without tension – the burning to the ground of 12 food stands in an outbreak of less than peace-enhancing radicalism not making the final cut of  Wadleigh’s extraordinary framing of ‘what’s happening in America’.

‘America is becoming a whole’, according to Sri Swami Satchidananda’s on-stage invocation, whoe sentiment I want to embrace.  But the mingling of idealism, optimism, wish-fulfilment, fear and anger about the war, and whatever else was going on then gives way today to, at the very least, a question: What the hell happened to these people?  These people, who looked so beautiful, who spoke without embarrassment about the potential for love to be realised as a political strategy, and some of whom created communitarian experiments that actually worked, who, at their most open were willing not to refuse light from any quarter – knowing that the only recently baptised military-industrial complex was failing humanity, so let’s look East…  What happened to them?

Well, they became my parents – and I can still see traces of the sentiments expressed in the field when my mum and dad talk about politics and tolerance, especially in a general suspicion of institutions that try to tell you how to be.  But my folks are just two people; and they weren’t even there.  It’s fashionable to say that more of the Woodstock generation learned indulgence than self-costing activism for a better world; that the gruesome scenes of Reaganite techno-greed a decade or so later were built on the foundations of a social cohort that had taught themselves they could have anything they want, and now.  And there may be some truth in that; surely some of the people responsible for nurturing the vision of being American as selfish, angry and afraid that came to dominate pubic discourse over the past forty years were in that field at Bethel.  But let’s also acknowledge that the leaders of recent social movements that have achieved real change were there too, at least in spirit.  There are still true believers out there; they still have something to say; they’re still doing things that would slow the world down, and would give us peace and music if we were ready to listen.

So, what ‘Woodstock’ means to me?

1: I’d love to make a film like this; and the democratisation of cinema may well allow someone to do just that right now.

2: My generation is lonelier than they were.

3: The Who look ridiculous; but so does everyone else.  Some in a good way.

4: The contrast between the anti-war movements of 1969 and 2009 depends on the existence of the draft.

5: The most pessimistic thing I can say?  Some of these people are saying the same things today that they said then.  And it didn’t work.

6: The most optimistic thing I can say? Watching Joe Cocker redefine what a human body needs to do to make a sound in 1969  (and it’s amazing) looks not that different from watching what Joe Cocker does to make a sound today (and it’s still amazing); if he can do it…well…

Categories: Cinema · Economics · Non-violence · Sexuality · Spirituality

This Week

July 27, 2009 · Leave a Comment

I’ve had a lot of feedback about my Naked post; and am happy that it has provoked some conversation.  I’ll write more on this theme in the future – please feel free to post comments with suggestions or questions for what you’d like me to explore.  I’m particularly interested in writing about the interaction between spirituality and sexuality; along with the kinds of questions Michael Pollan and others are asking about our relationship to food and psychology.

This week I’m in LA til mid-week, speaking yesterday at All Saints Beverly Hills and Risenchurch Santa Monica.  We had some fun talking about spirituality and the body; and today I’m trying to get some writing done before seeing ‘The Hurt Locker’.  Kathryn Bigelow’s film is being cited as her best  (which is seductive, given that ‘Point Break’ does what it’s trying to do better than most other films of its kind; and that ‘Strange Days’ took cybertechnology and crime seriously before it became the cliched trope of a hundred bad movies), and one of the tensest experience you could have a in a cinema (which is why I’ve avoided seeing it yet, not being sure that I’m in the right headspace for a war film whose reputation is built on being the most realistic depiction of combat horror realised for the screen).  But I plan to see it this afternoon; and I’ll post about it here; we’ll talk about it on The Film Talk soon.

Categories: Cinema · Sexuality · Spirituality

Naked

July 24, 2009 · 11 Comments

Red_tide_bioluminescence_at_midnight

“Your principal concern appears to be that the Creator of the universe will take offence at something people do while naked.  This prudery of yours contributes daily to the surplus of human misery.” – Sam Harris, ‘Letter to a Christian Nation’

“How beautiful you are, my darling!  Oh, how beautiful!…
Your lips are like a scarlet ribbon; your mouth is lovely…
Your two breasts are like two fawns, like twin fawns of a gazelle that browse among the lilies.…
Your lips drop sweetness as the honeycomb, my bride; milk and honey are under your tongue.  The fragrance of your garments is like that of Lebanon.…
You are a garden fountain, a well of flowing water streaming down from Lebanon.

Awake, north wind, and come, south wind!
Blow on my garden that its fragrance may spread abroad.
Let my lover come into his garden and taste its choice fruits.” – Song of Solomon

‘I often think that the Church is totally untrustable in the area of eros.’ – John O’Donohue

‘Cultures that are repressed will be awful at f***ing.  They will decline.  And when they decline because they are awful at f***ing, they will create pornography, experience an epidemic of promiscuity, and cause wars.’ – Dorian Pankowitz, the man who introduced surfing to Israel, paraphrased (but only slightly)

Standing naked on a Costa Rica beach three Mondays ago around midnight, and a few minutes later being flung under and above and through water by tropical surf, as the moon stared down, oblivious to my body, or generous in its refusal to notice, it occurred to me that being naked on a beach in Costa Rica was exactly where I wanted to be.  As if there were nowhere else that I actually could be.  And when I say ‘I’, I mean something more full than my superficial sentiments about vacations and what you should do with them.  I mean something closer to my fullest interpretation of what I really am – a human being, made, if God exists, in the image of God; privileged, to be at a wedding in Costa Rica (although the guests had left by the time I went skinny-dipping); and with the possibility of significant change, just by standing naked on a beach under the moon.

Now the fact is that writing this seems unwise; that some readers may be offended by my nakedness, even though I’m only talking about it, rather than showing it off.  The fact that I have had to censor the f-word in one of the quotations above is part of this same continuum: we can’t say the word in certain places for certain reasons, not least of which is the fact that it signals how afraid we are of our bodies.  But surely telling a story about how liberated I felt under the moon when I was naked can hardly be called exhibitionism?  I felt united with the sea – like I belonged there; like the earth was my home; like I fitted in my body.

It wasn’t a miracle; it wasn’t a transfiguration; and perhaps I’m the only person in the world who ever felt disconnected, or even a little dislocated from my physical frame; so this may mean absolutely nothing to anyone else reading.  If I were a poet, I could say this better – so if I’m de-railing your interest, please forgive me and come back later.  But if you’re still with me, let me say this:  I found myself waking up a little bit more to the fact of my own body – that whatever else is going on in the world, I have nowhere else to be except in my body.  That’s where I happen.  Not just my fuelling-and-emptying; or my experience of sexuality; or work or play: but ME.  My body is where I happen.  It seems to me that Sam Harris is more right than he knows – it’s not just religious institutions that can turn the body into a site of oppression: for our entire culture may be obsessed with it.  The beauty myth forced on us by media and cultural mavens deadens the soul on the one hand; but on the other, the denial of the body still present in so much of our religious and educational systems detaches us from our very selves.  We wander round in bodies that we don’t like because someone else has told us that we don’t look ‘right’;  as if it were possible for six billion people’s hopes to be reduced to our potential to emulate the cheek bone structure of the rich and famous.

This may be turning into a rant, so I’ll try to give it a soft landing.  I’m not sure that there’s much more to what I want to say than the fact that I was naked on a beach in Costa Rica and it made me feel more alive than I was before.  But if there is something more, it is this:

I have nowhere else to be except in my body. Nothing happens to, or with, or through me apart from my body.  Yet even though we tell ourselves that we have left the dualism that divides physicality and spirituality behind, it’s pretty clear that the competition for how we treat our bodies is still unsettled.  I need to tell myself that my body and I are better suited to befriending each other than denying who we are together.  I have a strong suspicion that the feeling of integration I had while naked on a beach in Costa Rica, while not denying the fact that some things are special because they’re unrepeatable, isn’t supposed to be the exception, but the rule.  I’m just not sure how to replicate it when I’m not on holiday.  But I know that, in the tension between being and becoming that I’m beginning to understand life to be, I want to.

*Photo credit: www.richarddawkins.net

Categories: Sexuality · Spirituality